IEEE STD 1547.7-2013 Guide For Conducting Impact Studies For DRI

IEEE Guide for Conducting Distribution
Impact Studies for Distributed

Resource Interconnection
IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee 21
Sponsored by the
IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee 21 on
Fuel Cells, Photovoltaics, Dispersed Generation, and Energy Storage
IEEE
3 Park Avenue IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
New York, NY 10016-5997
USA
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Tecnologica de Pereira. Downloaded on June 21,2016 at 20:50:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013

Sponsor
IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee 21

of the
IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee 21 on Fuel Cells, Photovoltaics,
Dispersed Generation, and Energy Storage
Approved 11 December 2013
IEEE-SA Standards Board
Abstract: IEEE Std 1547.7 is part of the IEEE 1547 series of standards. Whereas IEEE Std
1547-2003 provides mandatory requirements for the interconnection of distributed resources
(DR) with electric power systems (EPS), this guide does not presume the interconnection is IEEE
1547 compliant. Further, this guide does not interpret IEEE Std 1547 or other standards in
the IEEE 1547 series, and this guide does not provide additional requirements or
recommended practices related to the other IEEE 1547 documents. However, DR
interconnection may contribute to resultant conditions that could exceed what was normally
planned for and built into the distribution system. This guide provides alternative approaches and
good practices for engineering studies of the potential impacts of a DR or aggregate DR
interconnected to the electric power distribution system. This guide describes criteria, scope, and
extent for those engineering studies. Study scope and extent are described as functions of
identifiable characteristics of the DR, the EPS, and the interconnection. The intent includes
promoting impact study consistency while helping identify only those studies that should be
performed based on technically transparent criteria for the DR interconnection.
Keywords: distributed energy resources, distributed generation, distributed power, distributed

resources, distribution grid, distribution system, electric power systems, energy storage, federal
utility grid, fuel cells, grid interconnection requirements and specifications, IEEE 1547.7,
interconnection, microturbines, national, photovoltaic power systems, public utility commission,
regulations, renewable energy, rulemaking, regional, utility grid, utility grid dispersed generation
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

3 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10016-5997, USA
Copyright 2014 by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

All rights reserved. Published 28 February 2014. Printed in the United States of America.
IEEE is a registered trademark in the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, owned by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, Incorporated.
PDF: ISBN 978-0-7381-8872-0 STD98508

Print: ISBN 978-0-7381-8873-7 STDPD98508
IEEE prohibits discrimination, harassment, and bullying.

For more information, visit http://www.ieee.org/web/aboutus/whatis/policies/p9-26.html.
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written permission
of the publisher.
Important Notices and Disclaimers Concerning IEEE Standards Documents
IEEE documents are made available for use subject to important notices and legal disclaimers. These
notices and disclaimers, or a reference to this page, appear in all standards and may be found under the
heading Important Notice or Important Notices and Disclaimers Concerning IEEE Standards
Documents.
Notice and Disclaimer of Liability Concerning the Use of IEEE Standards
Documents
IEEE Standards documents (standards, recommended practices, and guides), both full-use and trial-use, are
developed within IEEE Societies and the Standards Coordinating Committees of the IEEE Standards
Association (IEEE-SA) Standards Board. IEEE (the Institute) develops its standards through a
consensus development process, approved by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), which
brings together volunteers representing varied viewpoints and interests to achieve the final product.
Volunteers are not necessarily members of the Institute and participate without compensation from IEEE.
While IEEE administers the process and establishes rules to promote fairness in the consensus development
process, IEEE does not independently evaluate, test, or verify the accuracy of any of the information or the
soundness of any judgments contained in its standards.
IEEE does not warrant or represent the accuracy or content of the material contained in its standards, and
expressly disclaims all warranties (express, implied and statutory) not included in this or any other
document relating to the standard, including, but not limited to, the warranties of: merchantability; fitness
for a particular purpose; non-infringement; and quality, accuracy, effectiveness, currency, or completeness
of material. In addition, IEEE disclaims any and all conditions relating to: results; and workmanlike effort.
IEEE standards documents are supplied AS IS and WITH ALL FAULTS.
Use of an IEEE standard is wholly voluntary. The existence of an IEEE standard does not imply that there
are no other ways to produce, test, measure, purchase, market, or provide other goods and services related
to the scope of the IEEE standard. Furthermore, the viewpoint expressed at the time a standard is approved
and issued is subject to change brought about through developments in the state of the art and comments
received from users of the standard.
In publishing and making its standards available, IEEE is not suggesting or rendering professional or other
services for, or on behalf of, any person or entity nor is IEEE undertaking to perform any duty owed by any
other person or entity to another. Any person utilizing any IEEE Standards document, should rely upon his
or her own independent judgment in the exercise of reasonable care in any given circumstances or, as
appropriate, seek the advice of a competent professional in determining the appropriateness of a given
IEEE standard.
IN NO EVENT SHALL IEEE BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,
EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO:
PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS;
OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY,
WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR
OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE PUBLICATION, USE OF, OR RELIANCE
UPON ANY STANDARD, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE AND
REGARDLESS OF WHETHER SUCH DAMAGE WAS FORESEEABLE.
Translations
The IEEE consensus development process involves the review of documents in English only. In the event
that an IEEE standard is translated, only the English version published by IEEE should be considered the
approved IEEE standard.
Official statements
A statement, written or oral, that is not processed in accordance with the IEEE-SA Standards Board
Operations Manual shall not be considered or inferred to be the official position of IEEE or any of its
committees and shall not be considered to be, or be relied upon as, a formal position of IEEE. At lectures,
symposia, seminars, or educational courses, an individual presenting information on IEEE standards shall
make it clear that his or her views should be considered the personal views of that individual rather than the
formal position of IEEE.
Comments on standards
Comments for revision of IEEE Standards documents are welcome from any interested party, regardless of
membership affiliation with IEEE. However, IEEE does not provide consulting information or advice
pertaining to IEEE Standards documents. Suggestions for changes in documents should be in the form of a
proposed change of text, together with appropriate supporting comments. Since IEEE standards represent a
consensus of concerned interests, it is important that any responses to comments and questions also receive
the concurrence of a balance of interests. For this reason, IEEE and the members of its societies and
Standards Coordinating Committees are not able to provide an instant response to comments or questions
except in those cases where the matter has previously been addressed. For the same reason, IEEE does not
respond to interpretation requests. Any person who would like to participate in revisions to an IEEE
standard is welcome to join the relevant IEEE working group.
Comments on standards should be submitted to the following address:
Secretary, IEEE-SA Standards Board

445 Hoes Lane
Piscataway, NJ 08854 USA
Laws and regulations
Users of IEEE Standards documents should consult all applicable laws and regulations. Compliance with
the provisions of any IEEE Standards document does not imply compliance to any applicable regulatory
requirements. Implementers of the standard are responsible for observing or referring to the applicable
regulatory requirements. IEEE does not, by the publication of its standards, intend to urge action that is not
in compliance with applicable laws, and these documents may not be construed as doing so.
Copyrights
IEEE draft and approved standards are copyrighted by IEEE under U.S. and international copyright laws.
They are made available by IEEE and are adopted for a wide variety of both public and private uses. These
include both use, by reference, in laws and regulations, and use in private self-regulation, standardization,
and the promotion of engineering practices and methods. By making these documents available for use and
adoption by public authorities and private users, IEEE does not waive any rights in copyright to the
documents.
Photocopies
Subject to payment of the appropriate fee, IEEE will grant users a limited, non-exclusive license to
photocopy portions of any individual standard for company or organizational internal use or individual,
non-commercial use only. To arrange for payment of licensing fees, please contact Copyright Clearance
Center, Customer Service, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA; +1 978 750 8400. Permission
to photocopy portions of any individual standard for educational classroom use can also be obtained
through the Copyright Clearance Center.
Updating of IEEE Standards documents
Users of IEEE Standards documents should be aware that these documents may be superseded at any time
by the issuance of new editions or may be amended from time to time through the issuance of amendments,
corrigenda, or errata. An official IEEE document at any point in time consists of the current edition of the
document together with any amendments, corrigenda, or errata then in effect.
Every IEEE standard is subjected to review at least every ten years. When a document is more than ten
years old and has not undergone a revision process, it is reasonable to conclude that its contents, although
still of some value, do not wholly reflect the present state of the art. Users are cautioned to check to
determine that they have the latest edition of any IEEE standard.
In order to determine whether a given document is the current edition and whether it has been amended
through the issuance of amendments, corrigenda, or errata, visit the IEEE-SA Website at
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/standards.jsp or contact IEEE at the address listed previously. For more
information about the IEEE SA or IEEEs standards development process, visit the IEEE-SA Website at
http://standards.ieee.org.
Errata
Errata, if any, for all IEEE standards can be accessed on the IEEE-SA Website at the following URL:
http://standards.ieee.org/findstds/errata/index.html. Users are encouraged to check this URL for errata
periodically.
Patents
Attention is called to the possibility that implementation of this standard may require use of subject matter
covered by patent rights. By publication of this standard, no position is taken by the IEEE with respect to
the existence or validity of any patent rights in connection therewith. If a patent holder or patent applicant
has filed a statement of assurance via an Accepted Letter of Assurance, then the statement is listed on the
IEEE-SA Website at http://standards.ieee.org/about/sasb/patcom/patents.html. Letters of Assurance may
indicate whether the Submitter is willing or unwilling to grant licenses under patent rights without
compensation or under reasonable rates, with reasonable terms and conditions that are demonstrably free of
any unfair discrimination to applicants desiring to obtain such licenses.
Essential Patent Claims may exist for which a Letter of Assurance has not been received. The IEEE is not
responsible for identifying Essential Patent Claims for which a license may be required, for conducting
inquiries into the legal validity or scope of Patents Claims, or determining whether any licensing terms or
conditions provided in connection with submission of a Letter of Assurance, if any, or in any licensing
agreements are reasonable or non-discriminatory. Users of this standard are expressly advised that
determination of the validity of any patent rights, and the risk of infringement of such rights, is entirely
their own responsibility. Further information may be obtained from the IEEE Standards Association.
Participants
At the time this IEEE guide was completed, the DRIS Working Group had the following membership:
Robert Saint, Chair

Thomas Basso, Secretary
Rasool Aghatehrani John Foster Rafael Nielson

Marcelo Algrain Joe Fox John Nunneley
Muhammed Ali John Gajda Gary Olson
Wendy Al-Mukdad Harjects Gill Marc Patterson
Robert Arritt Joerg Grosshennig David Pearce
Adil Aziz Jason Gunawardena Mark Pokryska
Martin Baier Jianlin Guo James Reilly
Mark Baldassari Joshua Hambrick Roy Riety
David Bassett Keith Harley D. Tom Rizy
David Beach Patrick Healey Roger Salas
Weruir Blumer Taylor Hollis Daniel Sammon
David Bosack Soonwook Hong Colin Schauder
Ryan Boudreau Iran Iqbal Karl Schoder
James Bridges Hiroshi Irie Brian Seal
Robert Broadwater Stoli Jager Paul Sheaffer
Drazena Brocilo Lu Jiang Michael Sheehan
Ken Brunkenhoefer Gerald Johnson Mark Siira
Yi Chen Hal Kamigaki Mark Smith
Christopher Clarke Farid Katiraei Gary Smullin
James Cleary Maeda Kazuto Farajollah Soudi
Michael Coddington David Kelley Jim Sprecher
Nancy Connelly Joseph L. Koepfinger Wayne Stec
Marv Dagatz Connie Komomua Chase Sun
Subir Das James Lemke Tzen Woo Tham
Herbert Daugherty Claudio Lima Michael Thesing
Richard DeBlasio Brian Lydic Scott Thomas
Mamadou Diong Hitoshi Maejima Sylvester Toe
Jose Dizon Nokhum Markushevich Brandon Tolentino
Dale Donovan Anthony Mazy Phuoc Tran
Michael Doyle Tom McDermott Philippe Venne
Robert Eastham Charles Mee Simon Wall
Peter Evans Bill Moncrief Reigh Walling
Masoud Farivar Zinn Morton Keith Walters
David Farmer George Moskos Allen Windhom
Omar Faruque Arun Narang Nicolas Wrathall
Markus Fischer David Nichols Timothy Zgonena
Rhys Foster Michael Zuercher-Martinson
At the time this draft guide was completed, SCC21 had the following membership:
Richard DeBlasio, Chair

Thomas Basso, Vice Chair and Secretary
David Bassett Kelvin Hecht Peter McNutt

Paul Bishop Yiming Hou Thomas Prevost
John Bzura Gerald Johnson Charles Rogers
James M. Daley Joseph L. Koepfinger Robert Saint
Douglas C. Dawson Benjamin Kroposki Mark Siira
Frank Goodman Timothy Zgonena
vi
Copyright 2014 IEEE. All rights reserved.
The following members of the individual balloting committee voted on this guide. Balloters may have
voted for approval, disapproval, or abstention.
Mohamed Abdel Khalek Keith Harley Alvaro Portillo

William Ackerman J. Harlow Daniel Leland Ransom
Steven Alexanderson Jeffrey Hauber James Reilly
Marcelo Algrain Patrick Healey Robert Robinson
Jay Anderson Werner Hoelzl Charles Rogers
Martin Baier Robert Hoerauf Ken Romano
Mark Baldassari Jerry Hohn John Rossetti
G. Bartok Soonwook Hong D. Daniel Sabin
David Bassett Joseph Jancauskas Robert Saint
Kenneth Behrendt Brian Johnson Chester Sandberg
Wallace Binder Gerald Johnson Steven Sano
William Bloethe Innocent Kamwa Bartien Sayogo
David Bosack Gael Kennedy Karl Schoder
Ryan Boudreau Yuri Khersonsky Thomas Schossig
James Bouford Morteza Khodaie Samuel Sciacca
James Bougie James Kinney Robert Seitz
Chris Brooks Boris Kogan Paul Sheaffer
David Brown Ljubomir Kojovic Mark Siira
Gustavo Brunello Benjamin Kroposki Amy Sinclair
William Byrd Jim Kulchisky Herbert Sinnock
Paul Cardinal Chung-Yiu Lam Jerry Smith
Keith Chow Raluca Lascu Gary Smullin
James Cleary Kevin Little John Spare
James Cole Omar Mazzoni Thomas Starai
Larry Conrad John McDaniel Wayne Stec
Stephen Conrad John McDonald Michael Stelts
Terry Conrad Hank McGlynn Gary Stoedter
Garth Corey Dean Miller Charles Sufana
Luis Coronado John Miller James Swank
Randall Crellin William Moncrief John Tengdin
Randall Cunico Jose Morales David Tepen
Matthew Davis Kimberly Mosley James Timperley
Kevin Donahoe Daniel Mulkey Elisabeth Tobin
Carlo Donaati Daniel Mungovan Sylvester Toe
Neal Dowling Jerry Murphy Demetrios Tziouvaras
Michael Doyle Mangapathirao Mynam Joe Uchiyama
Ahmed Elneweihi Arun Narang Eric Udren
Brian Escott Michael Newman John Vergis
Dan Evans Charles Ngethe Jane Vemer
David Farmer David Nichols Simon Wall
Omar Faruque Nick S. A. Nikjoo Reigh Walling
Rostyslaw Fostiak Joe Nims John Wang
Fredric Friend Matthew Norwalk Daniel Ward
Doaa Galal Lorraine Padden J. Weber
Frank Gerleve Mirko Palazzo Kenneth White
David Gilmer Panagiotis Papadopoulos Nicolas Wrathall
J. T. Gordon Bansi Patel Robert Yinger
Stephen Grier Subhash Patel James Zieberth
Randall Groves Marc Patterson Sergio Zimath
Donald Hall Christopher Petrola Michael Zuercher-Martinson
Dean Philips
vii
When the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved this guide on 11 December 2013, it had the following
membership:
John Kulick, Chair

David J. Law, Vice Chair
Richard H. Hulett, Past Chair
Konstantinos Karachalios, Secretary
Masayuki Ariyoshi Mark Halpin Gary Robinson

Peter Balma Gary Hoffman Jon Walter Rosdahl
Farooq Bari Paul Houz Adrian Stephens
Ted Burse Jim Hughes Peter Sutherland
Stephen Dukes Michael Janezic Yatin Trivedi
Jean-Philippe Faure Joseph L. Koepfinger* Phil Winston
Alexander Gelman Oleg Logvinov Yu Yuan
Ron Petersen
*Member Emeritus
Also included are the following nonvoting IEEE-SA Standards Board liaisons:
Richard DeBlasio, DOE Representative

Michael Janezic, NIST Representative
Julie Alessi
IEEE-SA Content Publishing
Soo H. Kim
IEEE-SA Technical Community Programs
viii
Introduction
This introduction is not part of IEEE Std 1547.7-2013, IEEE Guide for Conducting Distribution Impact Studies for
Distributed Resource Interconnection.
With the advent of IEEE Std 1547-2003, modern interconnection equipment has made great gains by
having universal interconnection and test requirements focused at the point of common coupling.
Additionally, since the adoption of IEEE Std 1547, there has been significant experience gained related
to inter-related technology systems and operational concepts to properly integrate distributed resources
(DR) into electric power systems (EPS). Traditionally, however, utility electric power systems were not
designed to accommodate active generation and storage at the distribution level. The addition of DR to an
EPS will change the system and its response in some manner. Increased adoption of distributed resources
throughout distribution systems often results in the need to perform a distribution system impact study.
This guide provides a common technical platform based on engineering knowledge to address study
methods for performing DR-EPS impact studies. This document includes an overview of general
considerations, operational considerations, configuration considerations, preliminary review criteria,
conventional and special impact studies methodologies, tools and technical issues, data requirements, and
examples of mitigation techniques. A sample methodology for using the guide is also provided. The
intended audience will gain a common technical understanding as well as an increased understanding of the
potential impacts of DR interconnection. The guide addresses engineering studies from a technical
perspective rather than a regulatory perspective. This document establishes guidance including multiple
approaches (alternatives/choices) using engineering studies based on engineering best practices, including
engineering characteristics, engineering studies methodologies, and engineering parameter criteria to
understand and use the engineering studies results.
ix
Contents
1. Overview .................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Scope ................................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Intended audience ................................................................................................................................ 2
1.4 Limitations ........................................................................................................................................... 2
1.5 Document structure.............................................................................................................................. 3
2. Normative references.................................................................................................................................. 4
3. Definitions .................................................................................................................................................. 4
3.1 Definitions ........................................................................................................................................... 4
3.2 Acronyms and abbreviations ............................................................................................................... 4
4. General considerations for DR impact studies ........................................................................................... 6

4.1 Potential DR impacts on the Area EPS ................................................................................................ 7
4.2 DR primary energy source-related considerations ............................................................................... 9
4.3 DR technology-specific considerations ..............................................................................................10
4.4 Area EPS-related considerations ........................................................................................................11
5. Operational and configuration considerations ...........................................................................................13

5.1 DR attributes affecting interconnection ..............................................................................................13
5.2 Area EPS attributes affecting interconnection ....................................................................................27
6. System impact example methodology .......................................................................................................33
7. Preliminary review criteria and sub-criteria ..............................................................................................34

7.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................34
7.2 Criteria ID P1Use of certified DR equipment .................................................................................37
7.3 Criteria ID P2Potential for unintended islands ...............................................................................39
7.4 Criteria ID P3Impact on EPS equipment loading under all steady state conditions .......................43
7.5 Criteria ID P4Impacts on system protection, fault conditions, and arc flash rating ........................45
7.6 Criteria ID P5Impacts on voltage regulation within the EPS under steady state conditions...........51
7.7 Criteria ID P6Impacts on EPS power quality .................................................................................57
8. Conventional distribution studies ..............................................................................................................60

8.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................60
8.2 Study ID C1Steady state simulation ...............................................................................................61
8.3 Study ID C2System protection studies ...........................................................................................63
8.4 Study ID C3Operational characteristicsloading, load shedding, etc. ..........................................71
9. Special system impact studies ...................................................................................................................72

9.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................72
9.2 Technical basis for the studies ............................................................................................................73
9.3 Study methodologies ..........................................................................................................................75
9.4 Study ID S1Quasi-static simulation ................................................................................................77
9.5 Study ID S2Dynamic simulation ....................................................................................................77
9.6 Study ID S3Electromagnetic transient simulation ..........................................................................80
9.7 Study ID S4Harmonics and flicker .................................................................................................83
10. Data requirements ....................................................................................................................................88

10.1 Data requirements and modeling for preliminary review studies .....................................................91
x
10.2 Data requirements for conventional studies ......................................................................................96
10.3 Data requirements for special studies .............................................................................................102
11. Impact mitigation overview ...................................................................................................................105

11.1 Potential solutions for unintended islands upon separation from the greater Area EPS .................105
11.2 Potential solutions for impacts on EPS equipment loading under all steady state conditions in
violation of requirements ........................................................................................................................107
11.3 Potential solutions for impacts on system protection and fault conditions in violation of
requirements ...........................................................................................................................................107
11.4 Potential solutions for impacts on voltage regulation within the EPS under steady state conditions
in violation of requirements ....................................................................................................................109
11.5 Potential solutions for impacts on power quality ............................................................................112
Annex A (informative) Bibliography ..........................................................................................................114
Annex B (informative) Sample data for impact studies ..............................................................................116

B.1 Main grid data ..................................................................................................................................116
B.2 Substation transformer data .............................................................................................................116
B.3 Load tap changer and voltage regulator data ...................................................................................117
B.4 Circuit breaker and recloser data......................................................................................................117
B.5 Capacitor bank data..........................................................................................................................118
B.6 Feeder protection equipment data ....................................................................................................118
B.7 Load data..........................................................................................................................................118
B.8 Feeder (sections) data.......................................................................................................................119
B.9 DER datarotating machine type ...................................................................................................119
B.10 DR dataelectronically coupled type ...........................................................................................120
B.11 Solar PV inverters ..........................................................................................................................120
B.12 Wind turbine inverters ...................................................................................................................121
B.13 Energy storage inverters.................................................................................................................121
Annex C (informative) Glossary .................................................................................................................123
xi
IMPORTANT NOTICE: IEEE Standards documents are not intended to ensure safety, security, health,
or environmental protection, or ensure against interference with or from other devices or networks.
Implementers of IEEE Standards documents are responsible for determining and complying with all
appropriate safety, security, environmental, health, and interference protection practices and all
applicable laws and regulations.
This IEEE document is made available for use subject to important notices and legal disclaimers.
These notices and disclaimers appear in all publications containing this document and may
be found under the heading Important Notice or Important Notices and Disclaimers
Concerning IEEE Documents. They can also be obtained on request from IEEE or viewed at
http://standards.ieee.org/IPR/disclaimers.html.
1. Overview
1.1 Scope
This guide describes criteria, scope, and extent for engineering studies of the impact on area electric power
systems of a distributed resource (DR) or aggregate distributed resource interconnected to an area electric
power distribution system.
1.2 Purpose
The creation of IEEE Std 1547-2003 has led to the increased adoption of DR throughout distribution
systems. 1,2 This document describes a methodology for performing engineering studies of the potential
impact of a DR interconnected to an area electric power distribution system. Study scope and extent are
described as functions of identifiable characteristics of the DR, the area electric power system, and the
interconnection. Criteria are described for determining the necessity of impact mitigation.
Establishment of this guide allows DR owners, interconnection contractors, area electric distribution power
system owners and operators, and regulatory bodies to have a described methodology for when distribution
1
IEEE publications are available from The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854,
USA (http://standards.ieee.org/).
2
Information on references can be found in Clause 2.
1
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
IEEE Guide for Conducting Distribution Impact Studies for Distributed Resource Interconnection
system impact studies are appropriate, what data are required, how they are performed, and how the study
results are evaluated. In the absence of such guidelines, the necessity and extent of DR interconnection
impact studies has been widely and inconsistently defined and applied.
1.3 Intended audience
This document is intended for use by a broad spectrum of individuals ranging from those having detailed
expertise in defined areas, to others having broad knowledge and interest. The intended audience includes
Area electric power system (EPS) operators, Area EPS owners, Area EPS planners, Area EPS designers,
Area EPS dispatchers, DR developers, DR owners, equipment manufacturers, regulators, and other
knowledgeable parties.
The intended audience will gain a common technical understanding as well as an increased understanding
of the potential impacts of DR interconnection. The guide addresses engineering studies from a technical
perspective rather than a regulatory perspective. The document establishes guidance including multiple
approaches (alternatives/choices) using engineering studies based on engineering best practices
engineering characteristics, engineering studies methodologies, and engineering parameter criteriato
understand and use the engineering studies results.
1.4 Limitations
This guide applies to all DR technologies at the point of common coupling (PCC)the point where a Local
EPS is connected to an Area EPSthat are interconnected with an Area EPS at typical primary or
secondary distribution voltage.
This guide does not provide guidance on how to meet business or tariff issues. However, it does
recognize that these are important to the interconnection of DR.
This guide addresses distribution system configurations typical to North America. However, the
methodologies as well as most of the evaluation criteria, studies, and mitigation techniques are
pertinent worldwide.
This guide does not apply to automatic transfer schemes in which load is transferred between a DR
and an Area EPS in a momentary make-before-break operation if the duration of paralleling is less
than 100 ms.
This guide does not interpret IEEE Std 1547 or other standards in the IEEE Std 1547 series.
This guide does not provide additional requirements or recommended practices related to other
IEEE Std 1547 standards.
This guide does not presume the DR interconnection is compliant with IEEE Std 1547.
This guide does not specify time frames to do the necessary impact studies.
This guide is not intended to address particular study issues pertinent exclusively to secondary grid
and spot networks in detail (IEEE Std 1547.6-2011 [B9]). 3 However, this guide is relevant for
many of the study requirements for DR on secondary grid and spot networks.
This guide is not intended to address particular study issues pertinent exclusively to DR on
intentional islands (IEEE Std 1547.4-2011 [B8]). However, this guide is relevant for many of the
study requirements for DR on intentional islands.
3
The numbers in brackets correspond to those of the bibliography in Annex A.
2
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
This guide does not address particular study issues pertinent exclusively to high penetration of
vehicle-to-grid applications. However, this guide is relevant for many of the study requirements
related to vehicle-to-grid applications.
This document does not address controls and communications security requirements.
This document does not address the impacts of distribution system interconnected DR on sub-
transmission and transmission systems.
1.5 Document structure
1.5.1 Introduction
Increased adoption of DR throughout distribution systems often results in the need to perform a distribution
system impact study. Various attempts by regulatory authorities to develop common procedures have
improved understanding of this process. However, as experience has been gained since the adoption of
IEEE Std 1547, a collective knowledge has been developed of criteria that is important to consider when
determining what studies need to be considered. This document provides and describes engineering
knowledge that is used for conducting impact studies.
This guide promotes impact study consistency and performing studies only when determined necessary. It
provides and describes the criteria, scope, and methodology for determining which engineering studies
need to be performed to assess the potential impact of DR interconnected to an Area EPS distribution
system. It provides descriptions of study types and tools, methodologies in using them for evaluation, and
the knowledge that will be gained from performing them. This guide also describes criteria for determining
the necessity of impact mitigation and provides sample mitigation techniques.
This guide provides the criteria DR owners, interconnection contractors, distribution power system owners
and operators, and regulatory bodies should consider. The evaluation of the criteria will provide guidance
in determining the appropriate distribution system impact studies, what data are required, how they are
performed, and how the study results should be applied. It is focused on maintaining IEEE Std 1547
requirements and consistency with IEEE Std 1547.1-2005 and IEEE Std 1547.2-2008.
1.5.2 Overview of the guide
This guide provides an overview of general considerations, operational considerations, configuration

considerations, preliminary review criteria, conventional and special impact studies methodologies, tools
and technical issues, data requirements, and examples of mitigation techniques. A sample methodology for
using the guide is also provided.
General considerations, operational considerations, and configuration considerations are important to

understand to determine the issues that may affect DR installation and operation. In addition, the current
state and anticipated state of the system when the DR comes online are important. These considerations
take into account the DR, local electrical system, and Area EPS issues.
The preliminary review criteria should be used to determine if conventional and special impact studies are
needed and as an initial determination of what impact studies need to be performed. The preliminary review
uses a tiered evaluation approach based on established evaluation criteria to determine appropriate extent of
what impact studies are to be undertaken. It provides multiple approaches to study potential issues.
The impact studies are categorized as conventional distribution studies and special system impact studies.
Each of these sections of the document describes the details of each impact study and the expected results
of the study.
3
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
The data requirements section establishes the identification of sets of data requirements based on different
studies, situations, and constraints on sources of data. The data requirements clause is organized to
facilitate the data needs for preliminary review and for particular impact studies.
The mitigation techniques clause provides examples of techniques used by various Area EPS operators to
solve the issues identified by the various impact studies. This clause is organized in the same way as the
preliminary review criteria to provide ease of cross reference.
This guide does not address cost issues and regulatory issues. Where these are mentioned they are intended
as an example of techniques used to determine the appropriate impact studies and mitigation techniques.
2. Normative references
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document (i.e., they must
be understood and used, so each referenced document is cited in text and its relationship to this document is
explained). For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of
the referenced document (including any amendments or corrigenda) applies.
IEEE Std 1547, IEEE Standard for Interconnecting Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems. 4
IEEE Std 1547.1, IEEE Standard Conformance Test Procedures for Equipment Interconnecting
Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems.
IEEE Std 1547.2, IEEE Application Guide for IEEE Std 1547, IEEE Standard for Interconnecting
Distributed Resources with Electric Power Systems.
3. Definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply. The IEEE Standards
Dictionary Online should be consulted for terms not defined in this clause. 5
3.1 Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations
line section: The smallest Area electric power system (EPS) section that could be energized by the
distributed resource (DR).
3.2 Acronyms and abbreviations
CAIDI customer average interruption duration index
CT current transformer
DFAG doubly-fed asynchronous generator
DFIG doubly-fed induction generator
4
The IEEE standards or products referred to in this clause are trademarks of The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
5
IEEE Standards Dictionary Online subscription is available at:
http://www.ieee.org/portal/innovate/products/standard/standards_dictionary.html.
4
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
DMS distribution management system
DR distributed resource
DTT direct transfer trip
EDA electronic design automation
EMS energy management system
EMTP electromagnetic transients program
EPS electric power system
ISE interconnection system equipment
kVA kilovolt-amperes
kVAr kilovolt-amperes reactive
LTC load tap changer
LVRT low-voltage ride-through
MVA mega volt amperes
NRTL nationally recognized testing laboratory
PCC point of common coupling
PID proportional, integral, and derivative
PLC programmable logic controller
PV photovoltaics
PT potential transformer
PPE personal protective equipment
PU per unit
SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition
SCCR short-circuit current contribution ratio
SOP system operating procedure
SSC short-circuit capacity
THD total harmonic distortion
TOV temporary overvoltage
UL Underwriters Laboratory
5
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
VR voltage regulator
VT voltage transformer (also known as PT potential transformer)
vars volt-amperes reactive
4. General considerations for DR impact studies

An impact study identifies potential problems and allows the Area EPS operator to determine the
modifications to the Area EPS facilities that could correct the problems identified in the impact study. In
some cases, the Area EPS operator may also prepare system-level studies to assess the cumulative or
combined impacts of multiple DR interconnections.
The impacts of the interconnection of DR at a particular location within the Area EPS depend on the
specific characteristics of the DR, the proposed interconnection, the proposed point of interconnection
within the Area EPS, and the specific characteristics of the Area EPS itself. The bigger the DR, the more
effect it is likely to have on the distribution system. For particular types of DR, such as inverter-based
photovoltaics (PV) or synchronous generation, there are technology-specific considerations that determine
the impact of the DR on the Area EPS. Characteristics of the DR that derive from its source of primary
energy, such as its variability, its predictability of operation under different circuit or EPS operating
conditions, and its dispatchability (or the ability to alter output as needed), also help determine the impact
of the DR on the EPS. Clause 5 provides additional discussion of attributes of the DR that affect
interconnection.
Accordingly, a tiered evaluation procedure provides the most efficient method for DR starting with an
understanding of the type and size of the DR under consideration, system limitations at the proposed
location of the DR, and the level of control or monitoring of the DR that will be available to the EPS
operator. Clause 6 outlines such a tiered approach, beginning with a preliminary evaluation of the
interconnection, a determination of the need for additional studies, then detailed studies as needed.
DR interconnection can impact an Area EPS at any level of penetration of DR. However, as the
aggregate output of DR approaches or exceeds the nearby load simultaneously served within the Area EPS,
this can materially affect local power flow and voltage within the Area EPS. The potential impact of each
DR addition on the Area EPS may require study. Thus, the impact on the Area EPS of an otherwise
identical DR may be different due to previously interconnected DR in the Area EPS.
DR interconnection can impact any Area EPS. However, DR interconnections at weak locations, such as
may be found on islands or at PCCs near the end of long, radial circuits, are more susceptible to DR
impacts than DR interconnections in strong interconnected systems with large generation sources.
Evaluation of the potential impacts of a particular DR on an Area EPS also requires a detailed
understanding of the characteristics of the nearby Area EPS itself. For example, some Area EPSs have
automatic sectionalizing equipment that divide the feeder into sections with automatic restoration devices.
This equipment is used in schemes intended to limit customer outages by isolating a permanently faulted
section of a feeder and restoring power to customers not directly connected to the faulted section. Since
these sectionalizing schemes break the feeder into smaller load sections, smaller DR installations can create
viable islanding situations. Also, the automatic transfer of isolated load sections has potential system
concerns. Clause 5 provides a more detailed discussion of how particular attributes of the Area EPS affect
DR interconnection.
Evaluation of the impact of the interconnection of a particular DR on an Area EPS at a particular point of
interconnection may be a multi-step process to direct efforts to known or likely issues in order to avoid
unnecessary studies. In such a process, the first technical evaluation is a preliminary review to determine if
the DR can be safely interconnected with a simplified evaluation. Clause 7 includes a more detailed
discussion of approaches to preliminary review of a DR interconnection and the conditions under which
6
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
such an evaluation is adequate. Clause 8 includes a more detailed discussion of approaches to a

conventional detailed impact study. In some cases, an impact study for the interconnection of a particular
DR may be indeterminate, necessitating special studies that go beyond the scope of a conventional impact
study or go into greater depth on particular issues. Clause 9 includes a more detailed discussion of special
studies.
4.1 Potential DR impacts on the Area EPS
A DR interconnection may impact the Area EPS in several general technical areas; these are described in
the following subclauses. A given DR to be interconnected with the Area EPS represents a unique set of
conditions. Not every DR will have the same impacts in these technical areas, nor is the following intended
as a complete list. The impact studies for a given DR interconnection, whether preliminary, conventional,
or special, are aimed at determining the impacts of the proposed interconnection on the Area EPS.
4.1.1 Unintentional islanding
Area EPS operating practices may isolate a section of the EPS by using sectionalizing and/or disconnecting
devices. Unintentional islands can be established when a section of the Area EPS is isolated from the
source while the load is supported by DR within the isolated section that continues to provide power.
Unintentional islands pose a threat to proper Area EPS system operation for a number of reasons.
Many radial systems include interrupting devices that are designed to trip and clear a fault and
automatically reconnect to restore load. Therefore, upstream Area EPSs might attempt to reconnect
into the island unsynchronized with voltage, frequency, and/or phase angle, which can damage
switchgear, power generation equipment, and customer equipment.
An unintentional island can increase public exposure to unsafe, energized downed conductors.
Line crews working on power restoration following storms or other events may encounter
unintentional energized islands, making their job more hazardous and slowing down the power
restoration process.
Unintentional islands do not have their generators set up with the proper controls to maintain power
quality conditions adequate to the customer loads, which may result in damages.
IEEE Std 1547 specifies DR systems detect the formation of an island and cease to energize the Area
EPS within two seconds. Anti-islanding protection can be accomplished through passive or active
detection, or by using communications methods. When passive or active anti-islanding is used, anti-
islanding techniques may not adequately detect island formation and cease to energize the Area EPS within
a suitable amount of time when DR output is close to the simultaneous or pre-fault load served within the
Area EPS.
Another potential impact of the DR unintentional islanding function is described in the following: Large
amounts of DR could be prone to tripping during severe transmission system disturbances that typically
affect a wide geographical area because of passive anti-islanding that is set to disconnect DR in the event
that the network voltage or frequency goes outside of predefined limits.
4.1.2 Area EPS equipment loading
Historically, Area EPSs at the distribution level were designed for unidirectional power flow, and
unidirectional short-circuit contribution, from the substation or primary source to the loads. Equipment
should operate within its planned rating and according to the Area EPS operating policies. DR may change
the power flow and appear to reduce loading. The loss of either the load or the DR may cause equipment
overloading.
7
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
The potential for impacts on Area EPS equipment loading has to take into consideration the active and
reactive power injected in the Area EPS by all DRs. These impacts may be more prevalent at off-peak
periods than during peak periods when nearby loads absorb the generation (e.g., PV without storage would
not generate power during night hours).
4.1.3 Protection design, coordination, and fault rating
Area EPS protection systems are designed to reduce the impact of faults that can be caused by lightning or
other problems on the Area EPS system. DR systems also need to coordinate with the protection systems
employed on distribution circuits. Typically a distribution system will employ a protection scheme that
consists of fuses, circuit breakers, sectionalizers, and automatic restoration devices that are coordinated in
the load direction to operate with a minimum number of customers affected. Adding DR to the distribution
circuit may affect coordination. Protection settings can be over sensitized (false trip) or desensitized (no
trip or delayed trip) by DR fault current contributions, depending on the location of the DR relative to the
existing protective device. This can cause issues depending on distribution circuit characteristics [B13].
Additionally, the connection of generation resources to a distribution feeder can introduce sources of short-
circuit current contribution to the distribution system. This could potentially result in increased short-circuit
currents, potentially reaching damaging levels and protection desensitization and a potential breach of
protection coordination. Consequences of reverse power flow also need to be assessed.
Some Area EPS operators have work practices that include performing work on energized equipment.
Some of these Area EPS operators have adopted the use of protective relays and automatic restoration
devices to limit the arc flash energy and to not permit reclosing of the protective device. These relays and
automatic restoration devices limit the arc flash energy to levels that will allow personnel to work on
energized equipment while wearing protective clothing that does not restrict movement. The arc flash
energy is determined by the amount of fault current and the time it takes to extinguish the arc caused by the
fault (measured in calories/cm2). The addition of DR may increase both the fault current and clearing time
associated with the arc flash energy. This arc flash energy may exceed the rating of protective clothing
which will dis-allow working on the energized equipment if the DR is operating. The DRs may need to be
disconnected from the Area EPS while live line work is being performed.
4.1.4 Voltage regulation and reactive power management
Steady state voltage is the voltage of the power system over a sustained period of time, usually considered
as several minutes in duration as defined in Annex I of IEEE Std 1547.2. Area EPS operators require
generation on the distribution system to be operated in a manner that does not cause the service voltage for
customers on the EPS to go outside the applicable limits. In addition, operation of the DR should be
designed to avoid causing interference with the normal operation of the Area EPSs voltage regulation
equipment. Where generation is variable in nature, the resultant voltage fluctuation may cause adverse
effects on voltage regulation equipment such as premature wear due to increased operations. Voltage
regulator controls may need to be modified or replaced when power may be injected from the load side of
the device.
DR also impact voltage levels when it injects power into the grid; this may cause abnormal voltage
conditions as DR serves a greater share of nearby Area EPS load. For example, induction generators may
lower the voltage, whereas PV may raise the voltage. Reactive power exchange at the PCC has an impact
on voltage regulation. DR output changes may occur more rapidly than the dead time and response time of
circuit voltage controls, in which case voltage fluctuations of approximately one minute or less can occur in
the Area EPS. These DR output changes could be due to faults, changes in energy availability, or startup
and shutdown. Additional concerns and costs associated with interconnecting DR at the distribution level
include wear and tear on transformer tap changers and power factor control equipment. Studies may be
needed to predict the voltage fluctuations of the Area EPS with large amounts of variable DR. Multiple
power flow simulations including time series or quasi-static simulations may be needed to fully study the
impacts of DR on Area EPS voltage.
8
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Finally, multiple DRs can have a cumulative effect on the voltage of the Area EPS. Impact studies should
therefore consider all DR present in the Area EPS.
4.1.5 Power quality
Impacts of DR on power quality include potential overvoltage, undervoltage, sags, swells, and flicker due
to specific events or rapid fluctuations in output of the DR and harmonic distortions.
Repeated, rapid changes in DR output can cause flicker. See IEEE Std 1453 and IEEE Std 1453.1. As
an example, solar and wind-based DR may contribute significantly to flicker. When connected to a weak
location within the Area EPS, wind turbines and photovoltaic plants contribution to flicker may become
problematic. This problem can arise with wind turbines due to rapid changes in wind conditions (e.g., wind
gusts), or with PV generation due to fast changes in irradiance caused by moving cloud cover.
Harmonics are distortions in the power system frequency sine wave. Power electronic based-switching
devices such as inverters can cause harmonics. Too much harmonic distortion can cause adverse operation
of customer and Area EPS equipment. Harmonic contribution from DR can be difficult to predict.
Furthermore, the same level of harmonic current from a DR may result in different levels of harmonic
voltage distortion depending on the Area EPS characteristics.
4.2 DR primary energy source-related considerations
A DRs source of primary energy affects its potential impact on the Area EPS through the DRs
predictability, variability, and dispatchability.
4.2.1 Predictability
Predictability refers to the ability of the DR to operate consistently in a forecasted manner. As an example,
chemical or combustible fuels as primary DR energy sources are generally very predictable (and may also
be dispatchable depending on contractual terms between the owner and the Area EPS operator). From the
perspective of the primary energy source, combustible fuel-based DRs may operate at any time, day or
night, and are not limited by their primary energy source to operation in certain periods. Combustible fuel-
based DRs are typically not subject to short-term variation in output due to unpredictable fluctuations in
primary energy availability. However, when and how a fuel-based DR may operate and how these affect
the Area EPS may be more subject to institutional considerations. For example, a digester or combined heat
and power unit may be scheduled to operate during certain periods to support operational practices of the
host that are wholly independent of Area EPS operational considerations.
4.2.2 Variability
Variability refers to unpredictable and uncontrollable short-term variation in the DR output. Solar energy,
for example, is a variable, as-available energy source. While solar energy is predictable in that it operates
during the day and never at night when Area EPS loads are typically at their minimums, it is also variable
in that it is subject to rapid changes in output due to changes in solar radiation. Further, solar DR projects
may have group exposure to output changes due to a cloud passing. Multiple solar DRs on a circuit may
smooth the impacts of a single DR.
Wind energy is also a variable, as-available energy source. And wind energy is also less predictable than
other primary energy sources. Wind DR projects may experience their maximum output at night during
minimum load periods, and may also experience minimum output during heat storms, simultaneous with
9
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
maximum Area EPS loads. Wind energy is subject to both seasonal and rapid changes in output. Wind DR
projects may have group exposure to output changes due to changing weather conditions.
4.2.3 Dispatchability
Dispatchability refers to the ability of the Area EPS operator to dictate or influence the electrical output of
the DR; dispatchability derives from contractual terms as well as the DRs source of primary energy. A
variable, as-available power source, such as wind or solar, may be dispatchable to reduce its output, but not
to increase it. On the other hand, if energy storage is combined with a variable power source, it may
become partially dispatchable, subject to the amount of energy stored at any given time.
4.3 DR technology-specific considerations
DR systems are generally classified by the type of generator that interfaces the system to the grid: 1)
inverters, and 2) rotating machines, including induction generators, doubly-fed asynchronous generators,
and synchronous generators. As they relate to interconnection to the Area EPS, these different DR systems
are distinguished by their fault current contribution, the ability of the DR to provide voltage support, and
the potential contribution to harmonic distortion. Further information on DR technology-specific
considerations is provided in 5.1.
4.3.1 Inverter-based generation
An inverter is a power electronic device that converts dc power from the primary energy source to ac power
suited to the grid. Inverters are typically associated with solar PV generation, microturbines, fuel cells,
some wind turbines, and battery energy storage systems. Inverter output current is limited and/or actively
controlled, so they typically contribute little ac fault current in excess of their full load rating. Inverter-
based DRs may be designed to be inherently capable of changing their output very rapidly. Inverters
typically detect EPS faults by voltage, current, and frequency measurements at their terminals. Inverters
compliant with IEEE Std 1547 use various active anti-islanding measures to detect when they are feeding
an island. Modern inverters typically have high quality sinusoidal output current waveforms, but their
output filter capacitors appear in parallel with the grid and should be taken into account when assessing the
potential for resonance.
Presently, inverter-based generation in UL Listed operating modes operates at a fixed, often unity power
factor and function as a current source when connected to the EPS. In this configuration, inverters do not
participate in active voltage regulation or reactive power management schemes. However, inverters have
the potential to do so.
4.3.2 Asynchronous (induction) generation
Induction generators are essentially induction motors used in a generating application. Since motors are
proven rugged technology and available in mass production, they are good candidates for DR applications
in ratings to 750 kW, corresponding to a motor size of 1000 hp. Induction generators need an external
source of reactive power to provide the rotor magnetization. They cannot control voltage or power factor.
They typically produce fault current for only a few cycles after a fault. In normal operation, induction
generators create little or no harmonic distortion. Induction generation has been in operation for decades
due to its capability to handle small change in input speeds, low cost compared to synchronous generation,
and small impact during faults.
10
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
4.3.3 Doubly-fed asynchronous generators
Doubly-fed asynchronous (induction) generators (DFAGs), also known as doubly-fed induction generators
(DFIGs), are a distinct class of asynchronous generators. They employ wound rotor induction machines
with static power converters to drive the rotor field currents. The physical rotational speed of the machine
can be varied over a wide range, both faster and slower than the synchronous speed. Unlike an ordinary
induction machine, a DFAG can supply or absorb reactive power, which allows power factor or net reactive
flow to be easily and quickly controlled. DFAGs are widely used in wind turbine applications.
4.3.4 Synchronous generation
A synchronous or ac generator is a rotating electrical machine designed to convert rotating mechanical

energy into ac electrical energy. Synchronous generators generate electricity by passing an armature
through a magnetic field. Synchronous generators have historically been driven using a source of primary
energy providing stable speed, such as combustion fuel, to generate electricity at nearly constant voltage
and constant frequency.
When connecting to the EPS, synchronous generators need to be synchronized to the EPS to avoid
equipment damage to both the generation equipment and the EPS. Synchronous generators normally
provide stable voltage, stable real and reactive power, and low levels of harmonic distortion. These
machines tend to behave as constant ac voltage sources due to their electromagnetic design, and as stable
frequency sources due to the rotational inertia associated with the mechanical mass. Therefore,
synchronous generators can run islanded (intended or not) because of their controls, built-in stability, and
the inertia in the rotating machine. When a fault occurs, they typically provide high fault current.
4.4 Area EPS-related considerations
Area EPS characteristics at the proposed point of common coupling also affect the DRs potential impact
on the Area EPS. These topics will be further discussed in 5.2 and are discussed briefly below.
4.4.1 Locally-served load
If the DR is to be connected on a radial distribution circuit, the load served on the circuit when the DR is
operating relative to the DRs output will have a bearing on the DRs potential to contribute to an
unintended island in the event of a fault. This load-to-generation relationship will also have a bearing on
the DRs potential impact on system voltage and system protection schemes.
4.4.2 System configuration
The configuration of the primary circuit at the point of common coupling (e.g., delta or wye-ground) may
have a bearing on the appropriate interconnection equipment.
4.4.3 EPS equipment ratings
The potential for the DR to exceed continuous current ratings as well as short-circuit capacities of Area
EPS equipment (e.g., line conductor, regulating equipment, reclosers, fuses, and step-down transformers)
needs to be considered under all operating scenarios, including during peak load, light load, and in the
event of loss of load.
11
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
4.4.4 System stiffness or weakness
System stiffness is the ability of an Area EPS to resist voltage deviations caused by DR or loading. The
stiffness ratio is generally used as an indicator for PCCs. The stiffness ratio is the relative strength of the
area EPS at the PCC compared with the DR, expressed in terms of the short-circuit (SC) kilovolt-amperes
(kVA) of the two systems. The stiffness ratio is calculated at the PCC, except when there is a transformer
dedicated to one customer. In this case, the stiffness ratio is calculated on the high-voltage side of the
dedicated transformer.
Stiffness ratio = SC kVA (Area EPS) + SC kVA (DR) = SC kVA (Area EPS) + 1 (1)
SC kVA (DR) SC kVA (DR)
where
SC kVA (Area EPS) is the short-circuit contribution in kilovolt-amperes of the Area EPS (including
all other sources)
SC kVA (DR) is the short-circuit contribution in kilovolt-amperes of the DR being evaluated
System stiffness is different at every point in the Area EPS. System stiffness or weakness is generally
indicated by the impedance within the Area EPS between the primary, or strong, source and the point of
interconnection of the DR. High impedance in a circuit between the circuits primary source and DR point
of common coupling suggests that the DR may have greater potential to affect system voltage, power
quality, and system protection schemes. Such a location within a circuit may be referred to as weak, or non-
stiff, and may be indicated numerically by relatively low fault current, ratio of the Area EPS short-circuit
kVA to the kVA rating of the DR, or stiffness ratio.
If the circuit in which the DR is proposed to be interconnected has other interconnected DR, the combined
output of these DRs and possible interactions between these DRs may have a bearing on the potential
impacts of the DR in question.
4.4.5 Voltage control measures
Existing voltage control measures within the Area EPS such as automatically switched capacitors, line
voltage regulators, or transformer tap changers on the circuit in which the DR is proposed to be connected
may have a bearing on the circuits ability to maintain system voltage and accommodate the DR.
4.4.6 Automatic restoration schemes
If the circuit in which the DR is proposed to be connected has automatic restoration features, the DR may
affect these schemes or the DR may have to be adapted to accommodate these schemes.
4.4.7 EPS topology
If the DR is to be connected to the Area EPS within a shared secondary, this may have a bearing on the
means available to address any impacts.
If the DR is to be connected to the Area EPS within a secondary network, this introduces a special set of
issues that is addressed in IEEE Std 1547.6.
12
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
4.4.8 Distribution automation
If the DR is to be connected to the Area EPS in an area with distribution automation features, particularly
automatic reconfiguration, the DR may affect the likely success of the reconfiguration attempted by the
scheme. Further, these reconfigurations may affect the protection schemes to accommodate the DR. There
could be a significant safety issue created, for example, when a reconfiguration results in short-circuit
duties that place equipment in jeopardy.
5. Operational and configuration considerations
5.1 DR attributes affecting interconnection
Integration issues exist related to the interface requirements for connection of DR to the Area EPS. There is
concern with the connection of such systems to the grid from the standpoints of personal safety, system
reliability, and system performance. If there is a failure in the Area EPS, customer-connected DR should
cease to energize the Area EPS. In addition, there is a concern with customer-connected DR potentially
degrading the reliability or quality of the area electric power system to which these devices are connected.
There are several factors that affect the nature and performance of DR interconnection. Each will be
described in some depth in the following subclauses. The specific combination of these factors along with
engineering judgment will help determine the system studies to consider.
5.1.1 DR primary energy source
Distributed generation often produces electrical energy at, or close to, the location where it is to be used. A
DRs source of primary energy affects its potential impact on the Area EPS through its predictability,
variability, and dispatchability. Predictability refers to the ability of the DR to be able to operate
consistently in a forecasted manner. Variability refers to unpredictable short-term variation in the output of
the DR. Dispatchability refers to the ability of the Area EPS operator to dictate or influence the output of
the DR; dispatchability derives from contractual terms as well as the DRs source of primary energy.
5.1.1.1 Fuel-based generation
A significant share of on-site power is produced by generators using fuel-driven combustion engines as the
energy source. Types in common use include reciprocating internal combustion engines, external
combustion Stirling engines, and rotary engines generally referred to as turbines.
Fuel cells convert chemical energy from a fuel source directly into electrical energy. Fuel cells generally
produce dc power, which is converted to ac power with an inverter.
Power from combustion engines is produced in the form of ac power either through a synchronous
generator operated at the desired frequency directly or through a conversion process involving an inverter
to produce ac at the desired frequency.
As a primary energy source for DR, combustible or chemical fuels are generally very predictable, non-
variable, and may be dispatchable depending on contractual terms between the owner and the Area EPS
operator. From the perspective of the primary energy source, fuel-based DR may operate at any time, day
or night, and are not limited by their primary energy source to operation in certain periods. Fuel-based DR
are typically not subject to short-term output variation due to unpredictable fluctuations in primary energy
availability. However, when and how fuel-based DR may operate and how these affect the Area EPS may
13
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
be more subject to institutional considerations. For example, a digester or combined heat and power unit
may be scheduled to operate during certain periods to support operational practices of the host that are
wholly independent of Area EPS operational considerations.
5.1.1.2 Wind energy
Most wind energy in North America is generated in large-scale wind plants, interconnected at the
transmission level. However, individual wind turbines, or small groups of turbines, are sometimes
interconnected at the distribution level as DR. To limit mechanical loads on the wind turbine, typically
some form of asynchronous generation, such as induction generators, doubly-fed generators, or generation
coupled to the grid via power converters is used. In the case of full-conversion designs, the actual generator
can be synchronous, permanent magnet, or induction; however, this is virtually irrelevant to the grid
interconnection because the power converter establishes the grid interaction attributes, not the generator
which is electrically decoupled. Used less frequently is a design using synchronous generators coupled to
the wind turbine with a variable speed mechanical drive (torque converter). Induction generators, directly
coupled to the grid, are capable of only a small amount of speed variation. The mechanical efficiency of
wind turbines is enhanced if the wind turbine can be operated over a wide range of rotational speeds as a
function of wind velocity. Therefore, wind turbines using doubly-fed generators or full power conversion
are becoming increasingly common.
Wind energy is an inherently variable source that is less predictable than fuel- or hydropower-based energy
sources. Wind generation output is often not well-correlated to system load demand. In many locations,
peak wind generation is at night. On a seasonal basis, generation output is often lowest during the hot
summer months. Meteorological conditions leading to maximum load demand, such as hot humid
conditions, are often the same conditions leading to low wind speeds and thus minimal wind generation
output.
In addition to the longer-term daily and seasonal variations in wind generation output, wind generation is
susceptible to short-term variations caused by wind gusts. Compared to large-scale wind plants, where
geographic diversity tends to greatly mitigate gust variability, small distribution-connected wind generation
can be highly variable. This can cause significant voltage variations in the Area EPS and possibly result in
excessive operating duty of line voltage regulators, substation transformer on-load tap changers, and
capacitor bank switches. In addition to gust variations, which may be of sufficient magnitude and frequency
to cause flicker, wind turbines can cause flicker due to other phenomena. Mechanical power variations
caused by the turbine blades passing by the tower can cause small electrical power variations in the 0.5 Hz
to 2.0 Hz range where flicker sensitivity is high. This is primarily an issue with induction wind generators,
which have relatively stiff coupling between mechanical power input and electrical output. For wind
turbine types with wider speed range, such as doubly-fed and full-conversion types, this blade passage
flicker is generally insignificant. Another type of voltage variation is caused by the initial energizing of
induction wind generators. Inrush current to support magnetization of the induction generator is highly
reactive and can cause significant voltage disturbance. During low wind conditions, wind turbines may cut
in and out often as the wind dithers about the critical startup speed. Doubly-fed and full conversion wind
turbines do not have appreciable cut-in transients and are not affected by this issue.
Induction and synchronous generators produce harmonics due to the spatial distribution of windings and
the discrete nature of stator slots. The power converters of full-conversion wind generators use pulse-width
modulation technology with switching frequencies typically in the several-kHz range. These harmonics are
easily filtered by the series and shunt filters of the power converter due to their high frequency. For wind
generator technologies, harmonic injection is quite small and is generally not significant compared to the
relatively large amounts of distortion caused by a wide variety of Area EPS nonlinear loads.
14
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
5.1.1.3 Water energy
Water energy has been used for centuries as a prime mover for industrial machinery. Hydroelectric and
pump storage plants have been in operation for many years. They range in size from a few watts to many
megawatts. Research is well advanced on utilizing the power of currents in rivers, the horizontal flow of
ocean tides, and the oscillation of ocean waves to produce electricity.
5.1.1.4 Solar electric energy
PV panels convert sunlight directly into dc electrical energy; PV energy systems generally use inverters to
convert dc power to ac power suitable for the grid. Solar thermal systems convert solar thermal energy to
mechanical energy to drive an electrical generator; examples include conventional turbine-generators and
Stirling engine-driven generators.
Solar energy is a variable, as-available energy source. Solar energy is predictable in that it operates reliably
during the day and never at night when Area EPS loads are typically at their minimums. It is variable as it
is subject to rapid changes in output due to changes in solar radiation; further, solar DR projects may have
group exposure to output changes from passing clouds. Multiple solar DRs on a circuit may reduce the
effective impact on the Area EPS of the variability of the individual DRs.
5.1.1.5 Energy storage systems
Energy storage systems provide electrical energy previously taken from an external source and stored.
Accordingly, storage appears to the Area EPS as a load as well as an energy source. In general, energy
storage as an energy source is inherently highly predictable, non-variable, and dispatchable to where energy
storage systems may be used to follow load, stabilize voltage and frequency, manage peak loads, improve
power quality, and defer Area EPS upgrade investments. At the same time, energy from a storage system is
dependent upon the availability of stored energy, so a storage system can somewhat address the
predictability, variability, and dispatchability of its ultimate primary energy source if the operation of the
storage system is associated or paired with a particular energy resource. However, except when a localized
issue is to be mitigated by storage, pairing of storage with a particular variable energy resource is
inherently less efficient, from both capacity and loss perspectives, than operating the storage to modify the
aggregate of all resources and loads to meet grid operating objectives.
Adding energy storage to a DR system can alter or improve DR variability and predictability and, under
close coordination with the Area EPS operator, can reduce the potential impact of these attributes on the
Area EPS.
Common types of energy storage systems that use different ultimate primary energy sources include the
following:
Batteries: Electrochemical systems store energy by using some sort of a chemical reaction, and this
energy can be reconverted to electrical energy in a manner and at a rate dependent on the
underlying technology. Battery storage systems are rated in terms of power delivery capability
(capacity) and energy storage capability (duration of discharge) and charge/dischage rates.
Pumped storage: Water is elevated to a higher level and the potential energy is retrieved on
demand.
Compressed air: Air may be compressed for storage using turbines driven by electricity (or some
other form of available energy), and the process may be reversed at a later time to retrieve the
stored energy for generating electricity.
Flywheel: Electrical energy is stored as kinetic energy in a flywheel and retrieved on demand.
15
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Supercapacitors: Supercapacitors store electrical energy in the form of an electrostatic field (in a
manner analogous to energy being stored by inductors in a magnetic field). They differ from
conventional capacitors essentially in their construction such that the storage density is orders of
magnitude greater than conventional capacitors. This stored energy can be retrieved on demand at a
rate and in a manner governed by the underlying technology.
Hybrid systems: On-site power facilities designed to utilize and combine several energy sources:
wind and solar. An internal combustion engine-powered generator may also be designed into the
system to supplement or replace the power from the windmill and/or PV cells.
5.1.2 Power generation technology at the PCC
From an interconnection perspective, DR systems are classified by the type of generator that interfaces the
system to the grid (e.g., inverters or rotating machines including inductive machines, doubly-fed
asynchronous machines, and synchronous machines). As they relate to interconnection to the Area EPS,
these different DR systems are distinguished by their fault current contribution, the ability of the DR to
provide voltage support, and the potential contribution to harmonic distortion.
5.1.2.1 Inverters
Inverter technology is one of the key methodologies for converting electrical energy from alternative
energy sources such as solar energy, wind power, flywheel energy storage, variable frequency generators,
microturbines, fuel cells, and superconducting magnetic energy storage to a form that can be used by the
EPS. Solar panels generate dc power, which is inverted into ac power to be linked to the Area EPS.
Microturbines spin at high speeds and generate high frequency ac power that is converted to normal power
frequencies. Some wind turbines use inverters for a similar purpose; in these machines the output frequency
of the turbine as well as the available power varies with wind speed. Inverters are used to convert the
varying speed into constant frequency power. The speed of a flywheel varies with the amount of kinetic
energy stored in its spinning mass. Therefore, the output frequency of a generator attached to a flywheel is
constantly changing as it discharges and recharges. Flywheel energy storage devices use bi-directional
inverters to interface with normal Area EPS power.
Inverters are minimal sources of fault current by design. Inverters intended to be connected and operated in
parallel with an Area EPS (termed grid-interactive mode of operation) are designed to behave as current
sources at power frequency as seen by the Area EPS. This is achieved through pulse-width modulation of
power-electronic switches using one of a variety of switching algorithms typically implemented in high-
speed microprocessors with the objective of causing the output current to continually track a sinusoidal
waveform of a targeted magnitude and at a desired phase angle relative to the Area EPS power frequency
voltage phasor. Both the magnitude and the phase angle set points can be changed automatically by internal
controls, essentially on a power frequency cycle basis, to meet a desired objective. For instance, to regulate
the ac power delivered to the Area EPS (active, reactive, or both), the set points are adjusted in response to
variations in the power frequency ac voltage phasor at the inverter terminals. Alternatively they may be
adjusted in response to operating limitations imposed by the prime mover energy source.
A parallel design objective implemented in inverter controls is the task of safeguarding the solid-state
switches against thermal overload. Since these switches have modest inherent thermal mass, they tend to
overheat very quickly when subjected to current levels beyond their continuous rating. High bandwidth
feedback controls are therefore incorporated to actively prevent overcurrents from exceeding permissible
values, such as disturbances in the Area EPS including nearby faults. Studies reported in literature for a
selected number of commercial designs suggest that fault current contributions can be limited to 120% of
the inverters continuous rating within a fraction of a cycle.
On three-phase inverters, controls are generally designed so the delivered three-phase current remains
essentially balanced irrespective of any unbalance that may exist in the three-phase voltage at the devices
16
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
terminals (or at the PCC), whether on an ongoing basis due to normal Area EPS operations or on a
temporary basis due to unbalanced faults in the Area EPS [B12].
The use of inverters in grid-connected generation applications has increased significantly since 2000. Some
standards for grid interface with inverters have been developed and others are being developed. These are:
IEEE Std 929-2000 (withdrawn); UL 1741; IEEE Std 1001-1988 (withdrawn); and Article 690 (Solar
Photovoltaic (PV) Systems) of NFPA 70. Guidelines are also established in the IEEE 1547 series of
standards.
As technical interconnection issues were being debated in the 1990s, attention was given to whether these
devices needed the additional familiar protection relays used for rotating generators. Through the process of
developing the earlier version of UL 1741, and IEEE Std 929 (withdrawn), a predecessor to IEEE Std
1547, it was determined that these solid-state devices could be tested to assure that they could reliably
provide some standard Area EPS protective functions (voltage and frequency trip), as well as additional
safety features such as anti-islanding at low penetrations. Large inverters may have additional system
reliability requirements, such as low-voltage ride-through, that may conflict with the current IEEE 1547
compliance methodology. The UL 1741 standard addresses the electrical interconnection design of various
forms of generating equipment. IEEE Std 1547 and IEEE Std 1547.1 further improved upon those test
procedures and applied them to machine-based interconnection systems. For grid-connected systems, UL
1741 (2005) supplements and is to be used in conjunction with IEEE Std 1547 and IEEE Std 1547.1.
5.1.2.2 Utility-interactive inverters
Utility-interactive inverters or grid-tied inverters use the EPS voltage waveform as a reference to match the
frequency of the output sinusoidal current to this waveform while exerting explicit control over its
magnitude with a high degree of precision (i.e., at a high control bandwidth). Some inverters may have a
designed-in capability of switching automatically between standalone and utility-interactive modes, either
in response to an external control command or based on internal prescribed criteria. However these types of
applications are beyond the present scope of this guide.
5.1.2.3 Stand-alone inverters
Stand-alone inverters are not the subject of Area EPS interconnection studies and lie outside the scope of
this document. Stand-alone inverters or off-grid inverters create their own reference voltage and frequency
and need to be capable of load following. These inverters are designed to supply power to an islanded
system while regulating voltage and frequency within specified limits. In general, the current delivery
capacity of stand-alone inverters needs to be larger than the maximum expected load demand in the island
(i.e., rated load current) to accommodate momentary overloads associated with initial energization of
certain loads (e.g., inrush current upon motor startup).
5.1.2.4 Induction generators
When an induction machine is driven above its synchronous speed, it becomes a generator and produces
electric energy. The same machine, when operated as a motor, uses electric energy to drive a mechanical
load at an asynchronous speed.
Traditional induction generators require an outside voltage source to support the magnetic field that
converts the prime mover mechanical power to electric generation. Area EPS operators typically supply the
voltage from synchronous generation on the Area EPS. Under conditions when the DR using an induction
generator is isolated from other generation in the Area EPS, the magnetic field in the induction generator is
expected to collapse and the DR should stop exporting power. In this manner, the Area EPS operator is
assured that the DR is not providing unregulated power to other customers in the isolated section. Isolated
17
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
induction generators can become self-excited when the reactive power produced by the capacitors is larger
than the reactive power consumed by the induction generator. While this effect decays with the resistance
in the circuit, damage can result on other customer equipment in the isolated section of the Area EPS.
Capacitors may be needed for DR with induction generators because induction generators have low power
factor. Detailed analysis of integration and operation of those capacitors is needed.
Some induction generator facilities are designed to be self-excited using capacitors, inverters, or
synchronous generators to independently support the magnetic field. These induction generator facilities
may require the same types of protection as synchronous generators and more complex analysis so they
will not create an island when disconnected from system generation.
5.1.2.5 Doubly-fed asynchronous generators
This type of generator uses ac excitation of its rotor, via a two-way power converter, to allow physical
rotation of the rotor at a speed substantially above and below synchronous speed, thus providing variable
speed operation. Although the rotor turns at a speed different than synchronous speed, the magnetic field
created by the rotor has an apparent rotation speed equal to the synchronous speed. These generators are
capable of very fast control of the real and reactive current injection to the grid. Therefore, performance
under normal operating conditions is similar to an inverter. However, during severe faults in the grid, the
rotor is normally crowbarred 6 to protect the power converter. When crowbarred, these machines
essentially become induction machines. The duration of the crowbar condition is a function of the fault type
and severity, as well as the details of the machine design.
5.1.2.6 Synchronous generators
A synchronous or ac generator is a rotating electrical machine designed to convert rotating

mechanicalenergy into ac electrical energy. Synchronous generators generate electricity by passing an
armature through a magnetic field created by a permanent magnet or electromagnetic field. Axial
generators can generate power by passing an armature through a field using a side-by-side motion.
Synchronous generators are available with a permanent magnet rotor or a wound rotor. Synchronous
generators have historically been driven using a prime mover providing stable speed to generate electricity
at nearly constant voltage and constant frequency.
Where variable speed operation is required, synchronous generators are interfaced to the EPS using back-
to-back power converters that act as a buffer to regulate the output voltage and frequency.
When connecting to the EPS, synchronous generators need to be synchronized to the EPS to avoid
equipment damage to both the generation equipment and the EPS. Wound rotor synchronous generators
have voltage control capabilities by means of explicit excitation of the rotor circuit.
Synchronous generators normally provide stable voltage, stable real and reactive power, and low levels of
harmonic distortion. These machines tend to behave as constant ac voltage sources due to their
electromagnetic design, and as stable frequency sources due to the rotational inertia associated with the
mechanical mass. Therefore, synchronous generators can run islanded (intended or not) because of their
controls, built in stability, and the inertia in the rotating machine. When a fault occurs, they typically
provide high fault current.
6
crowbar circuit: A protection circuit that rapidly short-circuits (or crowbars) the supply line if the voltage or current exceeds
defined limits. In practice, the resulting short blows a fuse or triggers other protection, which effectively shuts down the supply. This
is usually achieved by a silicon-controlled rectifier (SCR) or other silicon device in power supplies or by a mechanical shorting
device.
18
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
5.1.3 Connection, disconnection, and reconnection of DR
Generally, connection, disconnection, and reconnection of DR with the Area EPS for durations of greater
than 100 ms are mandated to comply with IEEE Std 1547 and other applicable standards as grid-
connected generation, and the impact of sudden connection or loss of the source on the Area EPS is a
consideration. Standby generators that operate parallel to the grid for less than 100 ms or that serve
islanded systems not connected to the Area EPS are outside the scope of this guide. When standby
generation operates in grid parallel for longer than 100 ms to serve customer requirements, then IEEE Std
1547 applies, and an impact study may be needed. Open, fast, and soft transitions are the common ways
to transfer from one power source to the other. The transition may affect the voltage on the Area EPS.
5.1.3.1 Open transition contactor or switch
Open transition is a break-before-make transfer between the on-site power system and Area EPS. The two
power sources are never connected together. This may be relevant to smart grid applications in the future as
capacity may be valued in certain situations. Impact studies are generally not performed for these systems.
5.1.3.2 Closed transition
Closed transition is a make-before-break transfer that allows the on-site generation to be paralleled with the
Area EPS for some period of timeeither as a soft transition or as peak shaving generation. Closed
transition systems need review.
5.1.3.3 Fast transition
Fast transition is a make-before-break transfer between the on-site power system and the Area EPS. The
two power sources paralleled for no greater than 100 ms. This document does not address fast-transition
issues.
5.1.3.4 Soft transition
Soft transition is a gradual power transfer between the on-site power system and the Area EPS. The two
power sources are paralleled, and the load is transferred from one power source to the other at a controlled
ramp rate. This mode typically employs paralleling switchgear. Impact studies are generally performed on
these systems.
5.1.4 Modes of synchronization
Any closed transition of the DR should synchronize properly.
5.1.4.1 Passive (sync check) synchronization
A system with a passive synchronizer does not actively control the on-site power system. It acts as a
permissive allowing paralleling of the generator with the area EPS. When the synchronizer indicates the
on-site power system is synchronized to the Area EPS, the system can perform a closed transfer or a fast
transfer.
NOTESystems do not have to be in synchronism for open transitions. However, the system residual voltage from
directly coupled rotating machines may be of concern with fast transfer schemes. 7
7
Notes in text, tables, and figures of a standard are given for information only and do not contain requirements needed to implement
this standard.
19
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
5.1.4.2 Active synchronization
A system with an active synchronizer will control an on-site power system and bring it into synchronism to
the Area EPS. When the synchronizer indicates the on-site power system is synchronized to the Area EPS,
the system can perform closed transfer, fast transfer, or soft transfer.
5.1.4.3 Active power enhancement (on-line uninterruptible power supply)
Instead of adjusting the on-site power system, the power electronics adjust to synchronize.
5.1.5 DR control systems
Controls need to be appropriate for the application. Slow controls can be an issue in some cases, such as the
following:
Programmable logic controllers (PLC) can be difficult to coordinate

Governor synchronizing
Control coordination
Multiple units
Voltage regulation and power factor control
Almost all DRs have one or more control systems. These systems are in place to monitor generator
operating parameters and to control and/or regulate various systems to maintain safe and efficient generator
operation per the DR owners intended mode of operation.
Some, but not all, DR control systems have interrelationships with the interconnection or the Area EPS.
Typically the interrelated control systems are in the areas of synchronizing, voltage and reactive power
control and/or regulation, and real power flow control and/or regulation.
Area EPS operators should, as part of their impact study efforts, carefully consider whether or not the DR
design may require active and maintained transfer of signals or information between the DR and Area EPS
equipment for proper operation. Simplicity of design should be considered, and a connection between DR
and Area EPS control systems should only be sought out when necessary for safe and efficient operation of
the DR and/or Area EPS. When necessary, design specifications should be clearly documented between
parties to assure proper and intended operation of the interconnection. Communications timing, delays,
control wiring voltage drop, etc. should all be carefully considered and documented. PLC, for example,
may have inherent delays associated with their operation that need to be accounted for in the overall system
design.
Proper synchronization is generally the responsibility of the DR. Both the Area EPS operator and DR
owner should expect to share and discuss synchronization parameters as part of an impact study.
DR equipment impacts voltage and reactive power exchange, as they are naturally electrically interrelated,
in either an active or passive way. One important aspect of an impact study is that it should document the
impact on the voltage levels and reactive power flows within the Area EPS. The impact study also should
consider how the existing voltage regulation scheme in the Area EPS and possible voltage regulation
schemes of the DR can be properly integrated to assure safe and efficient operation of the DR and/or Area
EPS. Typical issues to consider are whether or not the DR will operate with active voltage regulation (seeks
to maintain voltage near a set point through variable reactive power output or variable output power factor),
or with a fixed power factor (regardless of the voltage at the PCC or in the Area EPS).
20
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
The DR owner will likely have an intended mode of operation with respect to real power exchange with the
Area EPS. The nature of the primary source (predictable, variable, or dispatchable) often determines the
nature of real power flow across the interconnection. Some Area EPS operating practices may include
active monitoring of electrical values at the interconnection to maintain proper system operation.
5.1.6 Operating mode of DR
The primary DR operating mode consideration for interconnection is whether the unit is expected to export
power across the PCC. For example, where a DR unit is sized to offset a portion of the load served at the
same location (particularly one with features to prevent inadvertent export), then that will not change the
direction of power flow in the Area EPS, and that simplifies the evaluation of impacts of the
interconnection. Synchronizing requirements will be needed for all paralleling (closed transition) of DR
with the EPS regardless of the time that the systems are paralleled.
The Area EPS authority may specify the active power and reactive power control modes for interconnected
DR. For small DR, this may be an as available mode for active power and fixed power factor set point
for reactive power with a set point of 1, meaning no reactive power contribution. Some Area EPS operators
may request the capability to modify the mode of operation in real-time, such as when a DR is curtailed
because of feeder congestion. The major operating modes are as follows.
Active power control modes may include the following:
As available: In this mode, the DR is allowed to inject active power in the Area EPS up to its
nominal capacity without restrictions.
Fixed set point: In this mode, the DR injects a specified amount of active power as long as its
primary energy source is available.
Fixed delta: In this mode, the DR injects active power corresponding to a control signal minus a
predefined value. This method may be used when the DR is intended to offset a load.
Peak shaving: In this mode, the DR injects active power only when a control signal exceeds a
specified set point. When the set point is exceeded, the DR contributes the amount by which the set
point is exceeded. The control signal is updated in real-time.
Rate of change limitation (dP/dt): In this mode, the rate at which a DR increases or decreases its
active power production is limited to a specified rate. This method may be used to limit sudden
voltage variation at the PCC.
Dependent of time: In this mode, the DR adjusts its active power limit as a function of time and/or
date.
Dependent of Area EPS frequency: In this mode, the DR adjusts its active power limit as a function
of Area EPS frequency.
Dependent of Area EPS voltage amplitude: In this mode, the DR adjusts its active power limit as a
function of Area EPS voltage amplitude.
Reactive power control modes may include the following:
Fixed power factor set point: In this mode, the DR adjusts its reactive power contribution to meet a
specified power factor set point at the PCC.
Fixed var set point: In this mode, the DR injects a specified and constant amount of reactive power.
Fixed voltage set point at the PCC: In this mode, the DR adjusts its var contribution for the voltage
at the PCC to meet a specified value. This is often called closed-loop voltage control as a control
loop is used in the DR to determine in real-time the amount of vars to meet the voltage set point.
21
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Dependent of active power: In this mode, the DR adjusts its reactive power contribution as a
function of active power. It can take the form of a lookup table or of a slope function. It may
specify a var or a power factor contribution as a function of active power production.
Dependent of time: In this mode, the DR adjusts its reactive power limit as a function of time
and/or date.
Dependent of Area EPS voltage amplitude: In this mode, the DR adjusts its reactive power limit as
a function of Area EPS voltage amplitude.
Export modes may include the following:
As-available supplemental energy export.

System peak shaving.
System capacity support-dispatchable and integrated into the Area EPS operations. Traditionally,
generators are expected to provide a minimum level of system capacity support commensurate with
the generator size.
System voltage support dispatchable and integrated into Area EPS operations and typically under
Area EPS control. Traditionally, generators are expected to provide a minimum level of system
voltage support commensurate with the generator size.
Intentional islanding with other Area EPS customers; planned, designed, and engineered based on
agreed upon parameters with the Area EPS and non-DG customers on the island.
Non-export modes may include the following:
Facility peak load shaving-operation.

As-available supplemental energy production for facility use.
Emergency generator operations: There is open transition transfer where the generator is never
paralleled with the Area EPS, and no system impact when applied with the double-throw transfer
switch since the generator is never connected to the Area EPS. The Area EPS operator may review
the transfer switch design to verify that the switch design will prevent any accidental parallel.
Closed transition transfer parallel operation for 100 ms or less or as permitted by Area EPS
operator where the generator is paralleled with the system. Means of back-up generator separation
may be needed.
Closed transition transfer (parallel operation greater than 100 ms). Additional requirement is
dependent on the Area EPS operator practices. Only this type of emergency generator is covered by
IEEE Std 1547.
Standby generator applications may include the following:
In open transition transfer schemes when the generator is never paralleled with the Area EPS, there
is no system impact and no Area EPS impact study is required. However, the Area EPS operator
may review the transfer scheme design to verify that the generator will not accidentally parallel.
For closed transition transfer schemes of less than 100 ms duration, although the impact study is
not generally needed, the synchronizing will be required and a means of back-up generator
separation may be needed.
Area EPS practices may allow a longer transition time than 100 ms, in which case an impact study
may be necessary.
In general, the non-export mode of operation simplifies interconnection evaluation since the distribution
system is still operating within its original design parameters under normal loading conditions. For normal
loading conditions, this operating mode has the same effect on the Area EPS as load reduction. But for fault
conditions, the DR will back feed fault current in addition to the motor back feed. The fault contribution
22
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
effects on the existing distribution equipment will then need to be evaluated even for a non-export mode of
operation. The voltage profile will change on the distribution feeder when the DR comes on and off and
those need to be evaluated.
More extensive interconnection evaluation is suggested for export mode of operation since the Area EPS
was likely not designed to have reverse current flow under normal and fault conditions. The protection and
control devices on the feeder will need to be evaluated for the reverse flow impact.
5.1.7 Single-phase considerations
Most large DRs have three-phase outputs, however single-phase DRs are common up to about 10 kVA. A
single-phase DR is a good application for small kVA DRs and in locations where three-phase power is not
economically available.
Two major problems that may occur with single-phase DR are
Current imbalance
Faults
Single-phase DRs create the potential for imbalanced current flow on three-phase circuits. In areas where
most of the DR equipment is located on one or two phases, excessive current may flow through neutral and
ground points. In addition, excessive circulating current may flow in three-phase transformers. The latter
may cause overheating and/or saturation of these transformers.
Imbalanced current may lead to voltage imbalances. These voltage imbalances may create circulating
currents and operational difficulties with three-phase equipment such as three-phase transformers and
three-phase motors. For these reasons, single-phase DR equipment is typically placed on different phases in
order to attempt to balance the three-phase current flow. This task should take into account the coincidence
of DR generation and expected DR output.
The need for balanced DR is dependent on the amount of power exported by the DR and the amount and
balance of single-phase loads on each particular circuit where the DR is located.
It is anticipated that most single-phase DRs will be inverter controlled and therefore provide little fault
current contribution. However, the controls on these single-phase DRs may not be able to properly sense all
faults due to system configurations and therefore may contribute to fault current while continuing to
operate. The same issue may occur with a single-phase DR that is not inverter controlled depending on the
protection installed. In both cases, appropriate protection considerations could alleviate this issue.
Large differences of voltages between phases can affect Area EPS equipment and Area EPS customers
transformers and motors. The resultant overheating can cause equipment damage or can cause the
equipment to self-protect by tripping off-line.
There are several methods to protect against operation with excessive phase voltage and current imbalance.
Negative sequence relays watch for large imbalances in current. Voltage balance relays provide protection
against voltage imbalance.
There are several transformer configurations that can be used for connecting a single-phase DR. Single-
phase DRs can be directly connected to three-phase transformers line-to-line or line-to-neutral. Phase
currents need to be balanced to avoid imbalance issues.
Single-phase transformers often used for residential and commercial service have center taps providing
additional voltages (e.g., 12 470 V to 120 V/240 V transformers). A DR connected on the center tap has the
additional concerns of overloading individual windings on the single-phase transformer.
23
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Single-phase DR contribution to faults is dependent on the transformer configuration. The DR may

contribute to faults on phases other than the phase to which it is connected. The sensitivity to these faults is
highly dependent on transformer configuration and protection incorporated in the DR.
5.1.8 DR transformer connection type
Transformers may be used to connect DR to the EPS distribution system. Transformers are needed when
the DR voltage is different than the Area EPS voltage at the PCC. Transformers are also used to create
electrical isolation between the DR and the Area EPS. This isolation is dependent on DR technology used
and its effect on EPS protection systems and grounding. The impact of the DR interface transformer
configuration on the DR is beyond the scope of this guide. The Area EPS line configuration (3-wire or 4-
wire system) at the point of interconnection may dictate the type of transformer configuration. This is
discussed further in 5.2.
Standard distribution transformers are designed with the intention of having power flow from the primary,
or the Area EPS, to the secondary, or the load side. When the direction of power flow is reversed, as in a
DR application, the voltage on the secondary side is elevated beyond what it would be otherwise, given that
the voltage on the primary side is regulated by the Area EPS. Since the primary side voltage sometimes
approaches maximum permissible operating limits (e.g., under light load conditions, particularly at points
on the supply system close to regulating apparatus), a potential exists for voltage on the secondary winding
to exceed this limit in the presence of reverse power flow. The transformer secondary should be adequately
rated for such circumstances. Failure to do so risks subjecting the transformer core to flux levels beyond its
continuous capability. Potential consequences include additional heating of the core laminations causing
potential damage, voltage waveform distortion due to increasingly distorted magnetization current, and
higher leakage flux around the winding assembly causing additional copper (eddy-current) losses and
ultimately higher operating temperatures for the entire transformer assembly. All of these examples cause
accelerated aging of insulation and therefore reduce the transformers service life.
5.1.9 Generator grounding methods
Generally, generator grounding methods (the ground of the generator) should not be an issue related to a
DR impact study unless the DR interface is made without a step-up transformer or is made with a
transformer configuration that allows the pass-through of zero sequence current (such as wye-
grounded/wye-grounded interface transformers).
There are several generator grounding methods:
Ungrounded: This scheme is typically used with generators that are delta connected to provide high
reliability. The first accidental ground will not cause any fault current since the generator is not
grounded. The second ground on another phase will cause high phase-phase fault current. This
scheme should be used in conjunction with a ground fault detection system so that the first ground
can be identified and fixed promptly before the second ground occurs and potentially damages the
generator. Another issue is capacitive and inductive path-to-ground even if the generator is not
intentionally grounded. Therefore, there are operating issues associated with ungrounded
systems, including transient overvoltages that may result in voltages many times line-to-line
voltage. Transient overvoltages may occur if arcing ground faults occur typically due to cable
failure or other conductor failure. A well-designed ground detection system can help to avoid such
occurrences.
Impedance ground (reactance and resistance ground): Impedance grounding limits zero sequence
ground fault currents. Zero sequence fault levels produced by some generators may exceed three-
phase fault levels, potentially exceeding equipment ratings. If impedance grounding is not used,
zero sequence fault currents produced by the system may result in mis-operation of Area EPS
ground fault protection.
24
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Solid ground: This is typically used for small generators with lower fault current. The advantage is
simplicity and safety.
Per IEEE Std 1547, The grounding scheme of the DR interconnection shall not cause overvoltages that
exceed the rating of the equipment connected to the Area EPS and shall not disrupt the coordination of the
ground fault protection on the Area EPS. Also, see IEEE Std 62.90.2 and IEEE Std 62.92.3.
5.1.10 Remote control, monitoring, and protection of DR by Area EPS
IEEE Std 1547 states that DR larger than 250 kVA shall have monitoring provisions for monitoring
its connection status, real power output, reactive power output, and voltage at the point of DR connection.
Under certain conditions, depending on the size, impact, location, and local practices, some Area EPS
operators may specify remote control and monitoring of the DR.
Ultimately, the results of studies may lead the Area EPS operator to specify remote control and monitoring
of the DR. The ability to remotely control the DR may help to avoid or mitigate the impact of the DR on
the Area EPS.
Integrating DR into the Area EPS creates special challenges for system dispatchers because DR units are
usually geographically dispersed. A major challenge is the proper integration of DR units as resources in
energy management systems (EMS), distributed management systems (DMS), and Supervisory Control and
Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems of the Area EPS.
5.1.10.1 Operation status
The Area EPS may require that operating status signals (connected or disconnected) are sent from the DR
to the Area EPS. To that end, the Area EPS may assume the state of the DR main breaker to be the state of
the facility.
5.1.10.2 Monitoring
Real-time remote monitoring of DR active and reactive power contribution and voltage at the PCC may be
required by the Area EPS. This is specifically the case when the DR contribution is integrated in the EMS
and DMS.
5.1.10.3 Control
Even where DR is not dispatchable as a contractual matter, real-time remote control of DR set points may
be required by the Area EPS. This requirement can be motivated by the impact of the DR on the Area EPS.
There are possible issues of remote control by the Area EPS to the DR. Remote control by the Area EPS
may reduce the overall energy output of the DR, may be costly and labor intensive, and the DR may not be
available to the Area EPS when needed. Furthermore, the Area EPS may require remote opening and
locking of the DR main breaker.
5.1.10.4 Protection
The Area EPS protection scheme (see 5.2.5) may use transfer tripping features for the DR main breaker.
This can be motivated by requirements, the islanding risk, or temporary overvoltage risks. Transfer tripping
25
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
of the DR main breaker is different from remote control. Transfer tripping is automatic and is normally
executed on the order of milliseconds.
5.1.11 DR anti-islanding protection
The DR may have (or be required to have) features to detect a loss of the primary Area EPS source and trip
the DR in that event. Anti-islanding protection can rely on either sensing power system quantities locally,
or on communication of remote intelligence from Area EPS protection. In the case of the former, the
protective devices use local measured quantities to determine if the DR should be disconnected from the
EPS. There may be events where the protection cannot distinguish between disturbances on the line section
that the DR is connected to and those on adjacent line sections or feeders that ought to be isolated by Area
EPS protection. This may cause the DR to disconnect from the EPS causing a nuisance tripping of the DR.
In some circumstances, the anti-islanding protection may not be able to detect an island and therefore will
not separate the DR from a portion of the EPS that should be de-energized. Active anti-islanding protection
increases the probability of the DR disconnecting from the EPS during islanding events. However, nuisance
tripping may still occur since all local protection relies on sensing whether or not certain key system
parameters have violated specified limits to initiate tripping without accurate information on the response
of the upstream protective devices.
The communication-based approach is usually less economical, but allows the operation of isolating
devices at the DR facility and in the Area EPS to be coordinated such that the probability of an unintended
island forming may be reduced. Communication schemes become highly complex when the Area EPS is
subject to reconfiguration, particularly when reconfiguration is automated. When coordinated properly with
other protective devices, it can reduce the probability of nuisance tripping.
Communication-based schemes can fail to detect islands. There can be faults in the communication
scheme, or the island can be formed at a circuit point that is not monitored by the communication scheme,
for example, at an unmonitored fuse. For a fail-safe communication scheme, a failure of the communication
channel can cause a nuisance trip.
5.1.12 Low-voltage ride-through
The low-voltage ride-through (LVRT) approach for DR potentially supporting Area EPS voltage tends to
impose conditions on DR controls that shall then need to be coordinated with the unintentional islanding
required in IEEE Std 1547-2003. Assessment studies involving LVRT capabilities are beyond the scope
of this guide and IEEE Std 1547.
The term low-voltage ride-through refers to an operational functionality for the DR to respond to an
undervoltage condition in a prescribed manner differing from that stated in IEEE Std 1547-2003. Instead
of requiring that the DR cease to energize the Area EPS within a specified duration since the onset of the
condition, this LVRT operating mode may state the DR should either provide voltage support to the Area
EPS in a specified manner or switch to a mode whereby it ceases to energize output temporarily. The
precise LVRT DR response characteristics should be defined as a function of the magnitude and duration of
the area EPS undervoltage conditions. Furthermore, though IEEE Std 1547-2003 states that the DR
reconnection after an abnormal area EPS voltage condition may be delayed for up to five minutes after the
Area EPS has returned to normal voltage, the LVRT operating mode is aimed at stating more prescriptively
when the DR may resume operation; for example, immediately upon return of normal area EPS supply
conditions (provided this occurs within the time period contemplated by the LVRT response capability).
26
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
5.1.13 DR var capability
DR that relies on a variable primary energy source interconnected into a weak portion of the Area EPS may
cause voltage fluctuations. DR that are capable of providing volt amperes-reactive (var) support or are
capable of absorbing vars may be able to mitigate these voltage fluctuations so that less intrusive solutions
are possible. The voltage fluctuations caused by the fluctuations in power output of the DR would be
counteracted by changing the var output of the DR to compensate. To provide this capability, the service
transformer, the inverter, and/or the generator would need to be sized to support adequate var flow. A
control methodology, such as a constant leading (absorbing) power factor would be selected to mitigate the
voltage fluctuations caused by power fluctuations from the DR. Control methodologies that react to the
power fluctuation of the DR may be considered to be compliant with IEEE Std 1547. Control
methodologies that adjust var output in response to monitored voltage at the PCC may be considered out of
compliance with IEEE Std 1547.
5.2 Area EPS attributes affecting interconnection
The location of a PCC within the Area EPS and the type of power system in that area have important
effects on the interconnection requirements and impact studies. For example, direct transfer trip may be
complicated and expensive for a DR on a radial circuit with many switches and alternate sources, but less
so for a DR connected to a substation bus. Reverse power flow is a very important concern for DR
connected to low-voltage secondary networks, but less so for other DR connections. Voltage control and
voltage fluctuations are more important for interconnection points that are electrically distant from the
substation bus or in weak locations within the Area EPS. A radial circuit with individual voltage controls
may be better suited to manage variable DR output or reverse flow.
Systems that normally operate effectively grounded are usually more susceptible to temporary overvoltages
than ungrounded systems. Effectively grounded systems are usually not rated to withstand the temporary
overvoltage levels that may exist on ungrounded systems. When there is a choice, these factors can help
determine more economical locations for interconnection. Existing DR in the Area EPS need to be
considered as part of the Area EPS in impact studies for new interconnections.
5.2.1 EPS system configuration and grounding
The configuration of the Area EPS system grounding and the interface transformer associated with DR
interconnection can impact both the Area EPS and the Local EPS ground fault current contribution and
overvoltages during single-phase switching and faults on the Area EPS. There are many three-phase
transformer connection configurations used in multi-grounded neutral distribution systems in North
America. The first connection designation is that of the primary side which is connected to the Area EPS.
The second connection designation is the connection of the winding serving the Local EPS. Example
configurations include the following:
a) Y-grounded/Y-grounded
b) Y-grounded, Y-grounded/tertiary-delta
c) Delta/Y-grounded
d) Delta/Y-ungrounded (not common and not recommended)
e) Open-delta/open-delta (for load only, not typically for generators)
f) Delta/delta (not common)
g) T-grounded/T-grounded (not common)
h) Y-grounded/delta(i) Y-ungrounded/delta
27
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
On a four-wire multi-grounded neutral distribution system, the transformers are normally connected phase-
to-neutral except for delta/Y-grounded configurations and Y-ungrounded/delta configurations. These
configurations have the disadvantage of having some neutral current flow due to load unbalance, and it may
be difficult to set the ground relay to be very sensitive. For DRs with delta/Y-grounded configuration,
substantial overvoltages can occur after the loss of one phase of the area EPS (due to any of the following:
single-phase primary switching, fuse blow, or single line-to-earth fault) and before the DR supply is
isolated.
If the existing distribution transformers are connected wye grounded on the high side, the loss of substation
ground reference may cause line-to-line voltage to be impressed on the distribution transformers that are
only rated for line-to-neutral voltage under the ground fault condition with the DR backfeed.
A full discussion of this topic is complex and outside the scope of this guide. For further reading, see the
IEEE Std C62.90 series.
Primary grounding systems (typical) three-wire unigrounded at substation transformer neutral are
commonly used in conjunction with delta-wye grounded distribution transformers. The advantage is that
there is normally no zero sequence (residual) current flow, and the feeder ground relay can be set to be very
sensitive for excellent ground fault protection. The grounded wye secondary configuration also provides
good ground fault detection for the secondary system. This configuration works well on radial distribution
systems. But when the feeder breaker opens due to a ground fault, the normal ground reference at the
substation is disconnected and any DR connected through a delta high side transformer may not be able to
detect the ground fault on the feeder. So, separate ground fault detection may be required.
The DR impact study should model the grounding resistance according to the Area EPS practice.
In general, the power system needs to be grounded for personnel safety.
Secondary grounding systems (typical) can be:
Solidly grounded at the distribution transformer neutral for secondary Y configuration

Center tap grounded for 120 V/240 V single-phase transformer
Corner grounded for secondary delta configuration.
5.2.2 Information exchange for protection, control, and monitoring
Communication between distribution feeder relays and DR may have the following basic functions:
Protection function to transmit a transfer trip signal from the Area EPS to the DR
Protection function to transmit operating status (connected or disconnected) from the DR to the
Area EPS
Control
Monitoring
An Area EPS operator may request the exchange of information for status and protection purposes if there
is a significant possibility that the DR may inadvertently remain operating when the feeder breaker or
automatic restoration device opens. In this case, status and control would be used to indicate the DR is
online and allow the feeder protection and control systems to direct trip the DR breaker. For example,
information exchange may be useful if the feeder breaker or automatic restoration device does not open,
such as under a range of light load to heavier normal load conditions.
28
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
5.2.2.1 Operating status
Operating status signals (on or off) are sent from the DR to the feeder relay. This information may be used
to adapt feeder relay protection settings, as a permissive signal for closing the feeder breaker, as a
permissive signal for automatic reclosing, or for annunciation of DR status for system operators.
5.2.3 EPS equipment rating
The addition of DR to a feeder can result in equipment being subjected to faults beyond their short-circuit
current ratings including increased fault duty potentially leading to damage or failure. In some cases, this
can lead to unsafe conditions. DR that does not trip under fault or open substation breaker conditions can
result in equipment damage if reclosing is applied without a synchronism check in place. For certain types
and sizes of DR with delta high side transformer connections, backfeed on unfaulted phases under fault
conditions can result in overvoltages that damage equipment such as surge arresters, affecting both the
Area EPS and other customers in the vicinity of the DR. These conditions can result in unsafe conditions
for Area EPS operator and customer operating personnel.
If a sustained island is created, there is danger to Area EPS operator personnel who may not know that the
system is islanded and attempt to close a tie switch to an adjacent energized feeder.
5.2.4 System stiffness or weakness at the PCC
System stiffness or weakness refers to the ability of the Area EPS to resist voltage deviations from a DR.
System stiffness or weakness is specific to a particular point of interconnection and PCC within the Area
EPS. System stiffness or system weakness at a particular point within the Area EPS is indicated by the total
impedance of the Area EPS between the primary or strong source and that point. Any individual DR will
have some electrical impact on an Area EPS. Everything else equal, a given DR interconnected at a point in
the Area EPS where the total impedance is high (e.g., a weak or non-stiff location) will cause greater
voltage deviations in the Area EPS. Accordingly, there is greater potential for voltage-related impacts from
the DR in the Area EPS such as flicker, voltage fluctuations, or changes in steady state voltage.
The concept of electrical proximity is related to system stiffness or strength. A DR interconnected at a point
in the Area EPS where there is little cumulative impedance from the primary source at the substation may
be referred to as electrically close to the substation. A DR connected at such a location is likely to have less
voltage-related impacts on the Area EPS.
If the DR is small relative to the system stiffness (strength) at the PCC location in the Area EPS, then the
potential for Area EPS voltage deviations at the PCC is less. Numerically, a comparison of the power
(kVA) rating of the DR with the Area EPS short-circuit kVA at the PCC provides guidance to the DR
voltage potential impact on the Area EPSthe higher DR MVA capacity versus Area EPS short-circuit
MVA, the weaker the location, and the greater the potential of the DR to impact Area EPS voltage. A
simple ratio of the Area EPS short-circuit kVA divided by the kVA rating of the DR may provide a basis
for comparison to identify interconnections in weak (non-stiff) locations with the potential for greater
voltage-related impacts.
IEEE Std 1547.2 defines the stiffness ratio as the relative strength of the Area EPS at the PCC compared
with the DR, expressed in terms of the short-circuit kVA of the two systems. The stiffness ratio is
calculated at the PCC unless there is a transformer dedicated to one customer. In this case, the stiffness
ratio is calculated on the high-voltage side of the dedicated transformer. See Equation (1) in 4.4.4.
Short-circuit studies and power flow studies can document the potential of the DR to impact the Area
EPSs voltage, regardless of the weakness or stiffness of the Area EPS at the PCC.
29
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
5.2.5 Protection
The introduction of DR in a circuit can affect operating and fault current levels. Since the system operating
parameters may have changed significantly due to the addition of the DR, the existing protection scheme of
the Area EPS and its associated settings may not work as originally designed and should be evaluated under
these revised parameters.
The presence of a large DR on a feeder also has an effect on fault location practices. DR that have a large
contribution to short-circuit currents may cause an unexpected operation of fault indicators that are used to
locate fault position. In this situation, directional fault indicators can be used to help the Area EPS operator
better locate the fault.
Area EPS distribution systems are typically designed as radial systems with a single source feeding
distribution load. While system conditions may result in variable circuit configurations, distribution
systems and their associated protection systems are designed for one-way current flow and fault sensing. In
the case of a typical distribution feeder protective system, when a fault occurs, the various protective relays
sense the associated increase in fault current and trip a circuit breaker to de-energize the system, thus
clearing the fault. Reclosing may be present to restore service in the case of temporary faults, but for
permanent faults, the feeder will lock out and stay de-energized until the source of the fault can be
identified and repaired. In this way, protective systems assure the safety of the general public that may
come into contact with energized or faulted distribution system equipment as well as the safety of Area
EPS operator personnel responsible for the identification, switching, and repair of the system.
Proper application and setting of interconnection protection is meant to assure that the DR trips and
separates from the distribution system for fault conditions. Improper device application or settings can
result in the DR not sensing the faulted circuit conditions. In cases where large DR are applied, short-circuit
studies need to be completed to assure that backfeed from the DR source does not result in the desensitizing
of feeder relays or create sympathetic tripping due to reverse current flow through feeder protection for
faults on adjacent circuits. In some operating cases, such as a substation breaker being opened manually,
the DR generation could match the system load and not trip the DR. Each of these scenarios of improper
device application or settings compromises the safe operation of the distribution system.
Area EPS personnel may be accustomed to assuming that in a radial system, if an upstream switching or
protective device has operated, then the circuit is de-energized and therefore safe. If the interconnection
system protection functions fail and the circuit remains energized by the DR, an unsafe condition
(unintentional island) is created. While operating and safety procedures are normally required to verify that
a circuit is de-energized prior to beginning line-work, extra caution should be taken in cases where DR are
present. Visual inspection of the DR interconnection to assure that it has separated from the Area EPS
system should be considered. Many Area EPSs require an isolation device between the area EPS and the
DR that includes a readily accessible, lockable visible-break device operable by Area EPS operator
personnel.
Some Area EPS protection schemes may use transfer tripping features for a DR main breaker. This can be
motivated by the islanding risk within the Area EPS or temporary overvoltage risks within the Area EPS.
5.2.6 Voltage regulation on circuit
The Area EPS is designed to operate within set ranges of voltage. Most customers depend on their voltage
to be maintained within their applicable voltage limits to protect their equipment from excessive voltage or
overheating. Voltage regulation throughout the Area EPS may be accomplished in various ways, such as
using bus capacitors and load tap changers at substations and with line capacitor banks and voltage
regulators installed on the distribution circuits.
30
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Capacitor banks are used to offset reactive currents along the feeder and through the substation
transformers, which also reduces the voltage drop. These devices are typically operated two to four times
per day.
Load tap changers on the substation transformers operate more frequently, maintaining the bus voltage at
the substation within the allowed tolerance as the substation load increases and decreases throughout the
day.
Voltage regulators are located in the circuit so that the voltage can be maintained above the lower design
limit at peak load levels. Long or heavily loaded circuits may employ multiple sets of voltage regulators to
maintain voltage within the design range throughout the circuit. Voltage regulators may be set to operate at
30 second to one minute intervals. If there are multiple regulators, their response time needs to be
coordinated. Load tap changers and voltage regulators operate mechanically; therefore, voltage fluctuations
may also lead to increased operation of the regulating equipment, which could lead to increased
maintenance or premature failure. The voltage fluctuations caused by some types of DR may occur faster
than some voltage regulating equipment can react.
Some voltage regulator controls are designed based on the direction of power flow only coming from the
source substation. For this type of control, when the power is flowing from the DR through the voltage
regulator toward the substation, this control algorithm will misidentify the source side and cause the tap
changer to operate in the wrong direction. However, other control algorithms have been designed such that
they review the voltage after a tap change and modify the operation based on the actual voltage effect
observed. Some voltage regulator controls may need to be replaced with a unit to use these latter types of
algorithms.
5.2.7 Automatic restoration
Many radial systems include interrupting devices that are designed to trip and clear a fault and
automatically restore load. Many of these devices have settings that call for fault clearing and reclosing
with no intentional time delay. When DR is located beyond the interrupting device and the device attempts
to restore the connection before the DR has separated from the circuit, that DR is in violation of IEEE Std
1547 reclosing coordination requirement. In that case, the device may reclose the Area EPS with the DR
unsynchronized with voltage, frequency, and/or phase angle. This unsynchronized reclosing may damage
switchgear, power generation equipment, and customer equipment. Because of the potential damage to
equipment, the Area EPS operator may choose to increase the recloser delay to allow more time for the DR
to detect the recloser interruption and trip the DR. Some Area EPSs use a recloser delay of up to 10 seconds
when a DR is connected on a feeder. In some applications, this delay may not be sufficient to avoid
unsynchronized reclosing. Furthermore, a voltage block function may be installed on the recloser to prevent
reclosing if the DR fails to detect an island. As a last resort, the Area EPS operator may decide to disable
the recloser on the feeder.
5.2.8 Single-phase interconnection on a three-phase service
The addition of single-phase DR at a three-phase service may cause a voltage and phase imbalance. This
may lead to overheating of three-phase equipment and the neutral wire where these effects have not been
included in the design.
5.2.9 Shared secondary interconnection
DR connections into the Area EPS through secondary cable and distribution transformers cause a rise in the
secondary voltage when the generation exceeds the Local EPS load. Where the impedance of the secondary
circuit is high, or the primary voltage at the terminal of the distribution transformer is near the upper limit
31
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
of the operating voltage, an overvoltage condition may occur at the PCC. Where secondaries are shared by
multiple customers, DR located at one or more PCCs may cause the overvoltage conditions to be
experienced by several customers, including customers that may not have installed DR. Because the
secondary is often not modeled, potential for impacts from DR interconnection may be difficult to predict.
These effects may not be apparent under peak load conditions but may occur under off-peak conditions.
5.2.10 Area EPS topology
5.2.10.1 Radial primary topology
Radial primary distribution systems are designed so that the circuit is connected from a substation bus
while load is supplied along the circuit. This radial design has lower reliability than looped primary
topologies. The substations in radial designs are typically a single transformer and single bus section. A
short-circuit or open circuit anywhere upstream of the DR or load location will result in loss of power.
Installation of DR on radial circuits may result in reverse power flow along sections of the feeder.
5.2.10.2 Looped primary network topology
Distribution looped primary networks are designed so that the circuits are connected between the buses of
two substations while load is supplied along the circuit. This design provides a continuous supply to
customer load upon the loss of one substation supply, transformer, or bus section. The substations in this
design are typically a single transformer and single bus section. Upon loss of a substation transformer or
supply feeder, the substation bus is designed to remain energized through the backflow of power from the
network circuits supplied from other substation(s). Installation of DR on these types of circuits may affect
the flow of power through the network, which could cause overloads on some sections of the network
under various outage contingencies.
5.2.10.3 Secondary network topology
The distribution secondary networks are designed so that the multiple primary circuits are connected
through transformers and network protectors to secondary buses serving a single customer in spot networks
or to secondary circuits that serve multiple customers in secondary grid networks. Network protectors are
designed for automatically disconnecting a transformer from a secondary network in response to
predetermined electrical conditions on the primary feeder or transformer and for connecting a transformer
to a secondary network through manual or automatic control responsive to predetermined electrical
conditions on the feeder and the secondary network. These devices may not be monitored by telemetry,
which can lead to uncertainty of a single protectors status. When DR is operating in excess of the
connected customers load, all connected network protectors may open, which would cause an island
condition. IEEE Std 1547.6 addresses distribution secondary networks.
5.2.11 Concurrent tripping of multiple DRs
DRs on substations that experience a fault close to the substation may experience voltage sags sufficient to
initiate the protective relays and cause the DR to separate from the Area EPS. Substations that have
significant contributions from multiple DRs may find a marked increase in loading when a single event
causes multiple DRs to separate from the Area EPS. This condition may lead to the substation operating at
a reduced voltage until that voltage regulating equipment can compensate for the net loss of generation.
Concurrent restoration of the generation, if not designed to be staged, could lead to high voltage.
32
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
A transmission fault could also cause concurrent tripping of DR across a wide region of the Area EPS. In
portions of the Area EPS that contain a significant penetration of DR, the effects of the original fault could
be exacerbated by the loss of DR throughout the region.
Systems with a large penetration of motor loads may cause large voltage deviations during faults and some
other conditions (e.g., open circuit). DR may trip due to that voltage deviation. This tripping can be
mitigated with LVRT.
5.2.12 Existing DR on Area EPS
Existing DR already interconnected within the Area EPS may affect the impacts of a given interconnection.
As the aggregate output of DR approaches or exceeds the nearby load simultaneously served within the
Area EPS, this can materially affect local power flow and voltage within the Area EPS. Under loss of load
conditions, this aggregate generation could result in overloads of upstream equipment. DR as inverters
together with synchronous machines within a circuit may increase the chances for an unintended, sustained
island. Groups of DR may exhibit coincident behavior, multiplying their impacts on voltage and power
quality; one example is PV under partly cloudy conditions. The fault current contribution of a given DR
may become a concern when aggregated with the fault current contribution of existing DR on the circuit.
6. System impact example methodology

The example impact methodology is one approach for using this guide. The example methodology portrays
how to determine whether impact studies need to be performed, and if so, which ones and how to consider
the results.
The example methodology for using this guide includes the following steps:
Read the entire document. Each clause in this document provides information that is helpful in
effectively using this guide.
Review general considerations (Clause 4) and operational and configuration considerations (Clause
5) that may have an impact on the DR and Area EPS under consideration.
Review preliminary review criteria identified in Clause 7. Each of the criteria and relevant sub-
criteria will determine whether conventional or special study efforts are needed. Additional study
efforts may include conventional distribution studies (Clause 8) or special system impact studies
(Clause 9).
Acquire pertinent data identified in the data requirements section of this guide (Clause 10).
Perform conventional studies (Clause 8) that are needed as determined by the preliminary review.
The results of conventional studies may lead to technical approval of the DR installation, the need
for mitigation techniques, or the need for additional conventional or special system impact study
efforts. If additional studies are needed, data beyond that originally collected will most likely be
needed.
Perform special impact studies (Clause 9) as determined by the results of the preliminary review
and conventional studies. The result of the special impact studies may lead to additional impact
studies, additional conventional studies, the need for mitigation techniques, or technical approval of
the DR installation.
Determine any impact mitigation that is needed. Clause 11 provides an overview of impact
mitigation.
33
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
The example approach may involve several iterations. In many cases, the result of preliminary reviews and
impact studies may result in the need for additional studies. There may also be several alternative
approaches to impact mitigation. These approaches may also prompt the need for additional study efforts.
7. Preliminary review criteria and sub-criteria
7.1 Introduction
A preliminary review is done by examining the items listed in this clause to determine if the DR has the
potential to cause adverse effects to the operation, safety, and reliability of the Area EPS and to determine
if potential further studies need to be considered. A preliminary review of a proposed DR interconnection
should consider the impacts of the DR on the Area EPS for each of the criteria identified in Table 1. This
clause describes individual preliminary review criteria and sub-criteria related to each of these areas that
should be used to evaluate the DR in question. Each of the criteria and applicable sub-criteria should be
evaluated. Applicable sub-criteria may differ depending on the DRs interconnecting technology, primary
energy source, or other factors.
The preliminary review checks are designed to see if the addition of the DR will cause existing distribution
equipment ratings and settings to operate outside their original design parameters. If the DR does not cause
the existing equipment to operate outside their original design parameters, there are minimal impacts, and
preliminary review may be sufficient. Please note it is likely that the existing distribution system is
designed to operate in the radial direction, from the substation to load, and the DR may cause the current to
reverse and may cause the existing protection and control equipment, including but not limited to voltage
regulators, capacitor controls, and sectionalizers, to operate improperly. Under fault conditions, the DR will
contribute fault current, and the protective equipment ratings and settings may need to be checked. The
intent of the preliminary review is to allow the small units at low penetrations to be reviewed in a timely
manner to determine if higher level assessment studies may be needed.
Interconnecting power generation to the distribution portion of an EPS has potential impacts on the Area
EPS in the following general technical areas:
Potential for unintended islands upon separation from the Area EPS. The power produced by the
DR relative to the nearby load served and ability of the DR to reliably separate from the EPS should
be considered.
Impact on EPS equipment loading under all steady state conditions. This includes pure loads placed
on the EPS by the DR and DR at one customer location impacting other customers on a shared
secondary.
Impacts on protection design, coordination, and fault ratings. This includes impacts on a variety of
protection schemes, the affect faults have on the protection schemes, short-circuit current withstand
limits, minimum fault coverage, and arc flash energy limits.
Impacts on voltage regulation and reactive power management within the EPS under steady state
conditions, including both the voltage impacts of changes in DR output and the cumulative impacts
of multiple DRs on the voltage control range of the EPS.
Impacts on EPS power quality, including flicker, sags and swells, and harmonics.
The impacts of the interconnection of a particular DR to a particular EPS at a particular location depend on
the generation energy source, generation technology, modes of interconnection, modes of synchronization,
modes of DR operation, and the EPS itself. For particular types of DR technologies, such as inverter-based
PV or synchronous generation, there are technology-specific considerations that may mitigate or exacerbate
the ways in which the DR may impact the EPS. Whether the proposed interconnection is at three-phase or
single-phase and/or on a shared secondary may also mitigate or exacerbate the ways in which the DR may
34
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
impact the EPS. Efficient evaluation of these impacts in a preliminary review necessitates a firm
understanding of the type of DR under consideration, its characteristics under normal and off-normal
conditions, the details of the interconnection facilities, the level of control of the DR that will be available
to the EPS operator, and the extent of monitoring.
The impacts noted above may arise at any level of penetration of DR relative to the load served by the EPS.
However, in systems with small amounts of DR relative to load, the combined impacts of these DRs on the
EPS may be insignificant. As the DR production relative to load increases, the potential impact of each DR
addition on the EPS may be of increasing concern and require careful consideration.
These potential impacts are present for DR interconnections in any EPS. However, strong interconnected
systems with significant generation sources are less susceptible to DR impacts. Evaluation of the potential
impacts of a particular DR on an Area EPS requires a firm understanding of the details of the EPS itself,
including existing DR units already operating or approved for connection.
A preliminary review is done by examining the items listed in this clause to determine if the DR has the
potential to cause adverse effects to the operation, safety, and reliability of the Area EPS and to determine
if potential further studies need to be considered.
Table 1 identifies the preliminary review criteria and sub-criteria that need to be considered to properly
identify the studies that may need to be performed. A detailed description for each of the criteria and sub-
criteria can be found in the identified subclause in this clause of the document.
All of the criteria and applicable sub-criteria listed in Table 1 need to be considered. Each of these criteria
needs to be evaluated on an individual basis. When evaluating each of the criteria, applicable sub-criteria
need to be evaluated. If the criterion is met, no further study pertaining to that criterion is needed. If the
criterion is not met, additional study efforts may be needed. Additional study efforts may also be needed
due to other sub-criteria. If all the criteria identified in Table 1 are satisfied, a more detailed impact study
may not be needed.
35
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Table 1 Preliminary review criteria checklist
Criteria ID Clause Preliminary Review Criteria & Sub-Criteria Critera Met? Issues?
P1 7.2 Use of certified DR equipment
P2 7.3 Potential for unintended islands
P2.1 7.3.1 DR does not export power to area EPS at the PCC
P2.2 7.3.2 DR production relative to served load (penetration) is small
P2.3 7.3.3
DR interconnection incorporates acceptable anti-islanding protective features
P3 7.4 Impact on EPS equipment loading under all steady state conditions
Gross kVA rating of aggregate DR is no greater than the kVA rating of the EPS
P3.1 7.4.1
transformer serving the facility on a per phase basis.
Gross kVA rating of aggregate DR on a particular feeder or substation is no greater
P3.2 7.4.2
than the feeder or substation rating.
P4 7.5 Impacts on system protection, fault conditions, and arc flash rating
DR cannot cause any protective device or circuit component to exceed 85% to 90%
P4.1 7.5.1
of the short circuit interrupting capability
Aggregate DR on circuit does not contribute more than 10% of the circuits
P4.2 7.5.2
maximum fault current at the primary voltage point nearest the PCC.
P4.3 7.5.3 DR will interconnect with an Area EPS having radial topology
P4.4 7.5.4 DR will not cause temporary overvoltages during a phase to ground fault
Existing protection schemes are configured to allow for DR connected to the Area
P4.5 7.5.5
EPS
P5 7.6 Impacts on voltage regulation within the EPS under steady state conditions
P5.1 7.6.1 DR PCC is relatively strong or stiff location within the Area EPS
DR would not be anticipated to result in voltage rising above specified limits in the
P5.2 7.6.2
Area EPS .
Loss of DR or variation in output of DR would not be anticipated to result in voltage
P5.3 7.6.3
in the Area EPS falling below specified limits
Variation in output of DR would not be anticipated to necessitate changes of
P5.4 7.6.4
settings of Area EPS voltage regulating devices.
P5.5 7.6.5 DR is not expected to result in high voltage on shared secondary.
P6 7.7 Impacts on EPS power quality
P6.1 7.7.1 DR operation will not cause flicker exceeding limits at the PCC.
Real and reactive power flow from DR will not cause Area EPS voltage sags and
P6.2 7.7.2
swells
P6.3 7.7.3 DR operation will not cause harmonics at the PCC to exceed allowed limits
7.1.1 Additional studies
Potential study needs are typically conventional distribution studies while some special impact studies may
be identified from the criteria. The results of conventional distribution studies may identify special impact
studies or mitigation techniques that may need to be considered.
A preliminary review is performed by the Area EPS representatives to evaluate the attributes of a particular
proposed DR to be interconnected, the particular Area EPS, and the specific location and nature of the
interconnection. This preliminary review will determine if system impacts are likely to occur. If system
impacts are likely, then conventional distribution studies or special system impact studies should be
considered. The designation of C# refers to the conventional distribution study number, and S# refers
to the special system impact study number.
Conventional distribution studies (described in more detail in Clause 8) include:
Steady state simulation (C1)

System protection studies (C2)
Short-circuit analysis (C2.1)
36
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Protective device coordination (C2.2)

Automatic restoration coordination (C2.3)
Area EPS power system grounding (C2.4)
Synchronization (C2.5)
Unintentional islanding (C2.6)
Arc flash hazard study (C2.7)
Operational characteristics loading, load shedding, etc. (C3)
Special system impact studies (described in more detail in Clause 9) include:
Quasi-static simulation (S1)

Dynamic simulation (S2)
Electromagnetic transient simulation (S3)
Ferroresonance (S3.1)
Interaction of different types of DR (S3.2)
Temporary overvoltage (S3.3)
System grounding (S3.4)
DC injection (S3.5)
Harmonics and flicker (S4)
Harmonic analysis (S4.1)
Harmonic problems (S4.2)
Harmonic resonance (S4.3)
Flicker (S4.4)
7.2 Criteria ID P1Use of certified DR equipment
DR, determined in a preliminary review, to be using certified (also known as pre-certified or listed)
interconnection equipment appropriate for the given application exhibits predictable behavior under normal
and abnormal operating conditions. If the DR equipment is not certified, full testing may be required to
assure proper operation of the equipment.
While the definition of what constitutes certified varies, typical certification criteria are:
The DR has been tested in accordance with IEEE Std 1547.1 (and as applicable, also in
compliance with other appropriate codes and standards) by an accredited testing laboratorya
laboratory that is recognized by the appropriate regulatory body (nationally recognized by the
United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration in the U.S.). The DR has been labeled
and is publicly listed by the NRTL.
The accredited testing laboratory makes readily available for verification all test standards and
procedures it utilized in performing such DR equipment certification labeling and listing.
The intended use of the DR falls within the use or uses for which the DR was labeled and listed by
the accredited testing laboratory.
37
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
If the DR is an integrated equipment package such as an inverter, then the generator or other
electric source being utilized is compatible with the interconnection equipment and is consistent
with the testing and listing specified for this type of interconnection equipment.
If the DR includes only interface components (switchgear, multi-function relays, or other interface
devices), then generator or other electric source being utilized is compatible with the
interconnection equipment and is consistent with the testing and listing specified for this type of
interconnection equipment.
7.2.1 Technical basis for criteria
If the DR is certified for the application (e.g., an inverter that has been UL 1741 certified), then the Area
EPS operator has assurance that the DR will separate in a reasonable period of time and behave in other
predictable ways. If the interconnection equipment is UL 1741 certified, then the Area EPS operator can be
assured that the equipment has been tested to include the following:
Maximum-voltage measurements
Temperature range
Dielectric voltage-withstand
Output power characteristics
Output ratings
Input range
Harmonic distortion
Utility compatibility
Output overload
Short-circuit
DC input mis-wiring
Ventilation
Component short- and open-circuit
Load transfer
Loss of control circuit
Grounding impedance
Overcurrent protection calibration
Strain relief
Reduced spacing on printed wiring boards
Dielectric voltage-withstand
Shorted trace
Bonding conductor
Voltage surge
Calibration
Overvoltage
38
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Current withstand
Capacitor voltage determination
Stability
Static load
Compression
Rain and sprinkler
7.2.2 Applicability
This criterion applies to all DR interconnections.
7.2.3 Area EPS-specific considerations
None
7.2.4 Technology-specific considerationsinverters
A utility-interactive or grid-connected inverter is a current-controlled voltage source that cannot sustain a

voltage signal without a grid reference. This type of inverter uses the grid voltage as reference voltage,
generally is certified, and has minimal system impact.
When utility-interactive inverters are required to comply with IEEE Std 1547 and IEEE Std 1547.1
test procedures, the interconnection system equipment (over a size limit stated in IEEE Std 1547) are
required to have field adjustable trip limits and trip times for voltage and frequency.
Stand-alone inverters are voltage-controlled voltage sources and can generate power when grid reference is
not present. In parallel with the EPS, the fault current may be higher in the voltage source inverter but not
high enough for the distribution operator to rely on the voltage source inverter to reliably trip line devices.
7.2.5 Potential further studies
If DR equipment fails to meet this P1 criterion, then technical issues identified in Clause 8 and Clause 9
should be considered. Upon P1 criterion failure, at a minimum, system protection studies (C2) will need to
be performed to determine if the DR meets protection considerations.
7.3 Criteria ID P2Potential for unintended islands
DR may inadvertently continue to energize a portion of the Area EPS following separation from the greater
Area EPS due to a system fault or opening of an isolation device. This is particularly likely to happen if DR
production is large relative to nearby load and/or if the fault or islanding is undetected. This criterion is met
if sub-criterion P2.1, P2.2, or P2.3 is satisfied.
7.3.1 Sub-criteria ID P2.1DR does not export power to area EPS at the PCC
If a preliminary review determines that the DR interconnection is designed such that power cannot be
exported to the EPS across the PCC, then this sub-criterion is satisfied. Under some scenarios, such as
39
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
multiple types of DRs on a feeder, additional study may be needed. Intermittent DR may affect the Area
EPS voltage as discussed in sub-criterion P6.1.
7.3.1.1 Technical basis for sub-criterion
If the DR or its interconnection cannot export power across the PCC, then the customer appears to the Area
EPS as a traditional customer where power flows from the Area EPS to the customer in accordance with
how the Area EPS was designed.
7.3.1.2 Applicability
DR interconnections designed to export power across the PCC may be excluded from this criterion. These
interconnections may be addressed by sub-criteria P2.2 and P2.3.
7.3.1.3 Area EPS-specific considerations
In some jurisdictions, reverse power protection may be required. When the Area EPS has a fast automatic
restoration scheme and the DR is not of the inverter type, then the chance may be increased for an
attempted reclose into an out-of-sync, energized island, compared to an inverter based DR.
7.3.1.4 Potential further studies
If the DR will or may export power to the EPS across the PCC, the potential for the DR to inadvertently
continue to energize the EPS following a fault may be addressed by sub-criteria P2.2 and P2.3.
7.3.2 Sub-criteria ID P2.2DR production relative to served load (penetration) is small
If a preliminary review determines that the aggregate DR production in a circuit of a radial distribution
system is less than 33% of the measured minimum line section load when the DR is in operation, an
unintended island cannot be sustained and this sub-criterion is satisfied.
This evaluation should consider the likely match or mismatch of generation and load within the line section
at any given time by taking into account the expected minimum load and maximum generation within the
line section at times the DR is expected to be in operation. The likely match or mismatch of generation and
load includes various considerations such as time of day, day of the week (e.g., weekday vs. weekend), and
seasonal variations in load or generation.
Load data for each line section may be readily available or reliably estimated from data available. The
quality of the estimate and the degree of accuracy needed will be important in determining whether
additional studies are needed to assess this criterion. The accuracy needed is dependent on the amount of
aggregated DR as a percentage of the minimum load. The lower the percentage of DR, the lower the
accuracy need.
These criteria apply for the time period the energy source of the DR is available. For solar PV DR,
applicable time period is daytime hours when sunlight is available. For all other energy sources (e.g., wind,
natural gas, coal, methane gas, etc.), applicable time is all hours of the day.
The effects of DR penetration on the steady state voltage should also be considered as identified in criteria
P5 and P6.
40
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
For fuel-based DR and wind generation that may operate at any time, it is appropriate to evaluate the
potential for an unintended island relative to the line section minimum load. For PV DR that operates only
during the day, line section load data to indicate the minimum load during the period the DR is operating
may not be available but may be estimated from line section peak load or minimum load values.
For inductive and synchronous DR, IEEE Std 1547.2 refers to findings of an IEEE paper titled
Ferroresonance and Loading Relationships for DSG Installations [B5] based on simulations and field
tests of induction and synchronous generation islanded with various amounts of power factor-correcting
capacitive kVAr. It was shown that as the pre-island loading approached three times the generation, no
excitation condition could exist to support the continued power generation.
If all DRs in a circuit of a distribution system are solar PV, aggregate solar PV DR production less than
loads cannot support creation of an unintended island. Therefore, for solar PV DR, 100% of the minimum
daytime load can be considered if all other DRs in a circuit are solar PV systems.
This sub-criterion applies to DR interconnections designed to export power across the PCC. For inverter-
based DR interconnections designed to export power across the PCC, sub-criterion P2.3 also applies.
7.3.2.3 Exceptions to sub-criterion
This sub-criterion does not apply for DR island systems that are intentionally planned. For details on
planning and creating intentional islands, see IEEE Std 1547.4.
Where the Area EPS is operated with an automatic restoration scheme, this sub-criterion should be
evaluated at the line section. Where there is synchronous DR and inverter-based DR within the same Area
EPS line section they may interact in a way to extend the duration of a potential unintended island.
7.3.2.5 Technology-specific considerationPV generation
PV generation only operates during daytime hours, during which, if a fault occurs, the line section is
unlikely to be experiencing its minimum loads. Accordingly, it may be appropriate to apply this sub-
criterion using line section minimum daytime loads.
If this sub-criterion cannot be met, then consideration should be given to applying the mitigation techniques
such as those identified in 11.1.1 and 11.1.2.
Minimum load studies may need to be conducted for every line section between the DR and the Area EPS
source substation including the power transformer at the source substation. This analysis involves
researching the most recent annual historical minimum load data for each line section. If this data is not
available, a load flow study may be considered to determine the load in each line section.
41
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Detailed impact studies may be needed where the aggregate DR capacity exceeds this criterion at any
automatic restoration device. Additional study efforts may be needed if the DR is synchronous generation
and an automatic restoration device is present.
Steady state simulation study (C1) and system protection studies (C2) may need to be performed if this sub-
criterion is not met. These studies may potentially lead to special impact studies including quasi-static
simulation (S1), dynamic simulation (S2), and electromagnetic transient simulation (S3).
Technical issues to be considered, if this sub-criterion is not met, include: protective device coordination
(C2.2), automatic restoration coordination (C2.3), operational characteristics (C3), and system stability
(S2.2).
7.3.3 Sub-criteria ID P2.3DR interconnection incorporates acceptable anti-islanding

protective features
If a preliminary review determines that an interconnection for DR incorporates acceptable anti-islanding

protective functions, irrespective of DR production relative to load or expected export across the PCC, this
sub-criterion is satisfied.
Guidance on acceptable anti-islanding protective features is stated in footnote 12 of IEEE Std 1547.
This sub-criterion applies to DR interconnections designed to export power across the PCC. The DR anti-
islanding protection requirement needs to be met at the PCC. For DR with integral isolation delta-wye or
wye-delta transformers, this requirement applies at the Area EPS side of the transformer.
Where the Area EPS has a fast automatic restoration scheme, the DR may increase the chance of an
attempted reclose into an out-of-sync, energized island. IEEE Std 1547 specifies that the DR shall detect
an island within two seconds. Some Area EPS operating practices may specify reclosing times faster than
two seconds. The DR shall cease to energize the Area EPS circuit to which it is connected prior to reclosure
by the Area EPS.
Where there are synchronous machines and inverter-based DR within the same Area EPS line section, this
may introduce further risk of an unintended island even with anti-islanding features in place.
In some jurisdictions the DR may be required to trip for all faults.
7.3.3.4 Technology-specific considerations
None identified at this time.
42
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
such as those identified in 11.1.1 and 11.1.2.
There is a variety of fault and system conditions under which inverter-based generation may continue to
apply voltage to the Area EPS without non-islanding protective functions. Inverter-based DR
interconnections incorporating delta-wye or wye-delta transformers may not detect ground faults within the
Area EPS. Further, inverter-based generation on a single-phase interconnection may fail to detect EPS
faults on another phase. Also, PV, as one class of inverter-based DR, may often export to the Area EPS at
the PCC.
A steady state simulation study (C1) and system protection studies (C2) may need to be performed if this
sub-criterion is not met. These studies may potentially lead to special impact studies including quasi-static
simulation (S1), dynamic simulation (S2), and transient simulation (S3).
Technical issues to be considered, if this sub-criterion is not met, include protective device coordination
(C2.2), automatic restoration coordination (C2.3), operational characteristics (C3), and system stability
(S2.2).
7.4 Criteria ID P3Impact on EPS equipment loading under all steady state
conditions
Normal output from the proposed and existing DR interconnection may introduce operating currents
affecting EPS equipment loading and voltage regulation operation. Sub-criterion P3.1 and P3.2 need to be
met for this criterion to be met.
7.4.1 Sub-criteria ID P3.1Gross kVA rating of aggregate DR is no greater than the kVA
rating of the EPS transformer serving the facility on a per phase basis
If a preliminary review determines that for a single-phase DR and single-phase EPS transformer serving the
facility, the gross kVA rating of the aggregated DR will not exceed the single-phase kVA rating of the EPS
transformer serving the facility, it is likely that the DR will not exceed the capability of the EPS
transformer and nearby EPS equipment even in the event of a loss of onsite load and this sub-criterion is
satisfied. For DR connected to three-phase EPS transformers, the aggregated DR per phase kVA shall not
exceed the equivalent per phase transformer kVA. This sub-criterion generally applies to DR
interconnected to an existing transformer. These transformers may not be rated for reverse power
applications. Note that if the transformer is not specifically rated for reverse power flow, the kVA
capability of the transformer for reverse power flow may be less than the transformer rating. The reverse
power flow rating may be available for some transformers.
Under a loss of onsite load condition (with no system fault) the entire output of the proposed DR will be
delivered to the Area EPS. Where this sub-criterion is met it is unlikely that this will result in an overload
of any Area EPS equipment upstream unless there is substantial aggregated DR on the transformer.
Typically, the smallest single-phase distribution pad-mount transformer is rated at 25 kVA. The smallest
single-phase distribution overhead transformer is typically rated at 5 kVA-10 kVA. Based on the loading
limit of the transformer, most small DR (less than 10 kW) would be within the acceptable loading range of
the transformer across all climate zones.
43
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
This sub-criterion applies primarily to DR interconnections intended to serve local loads on the customer
side of the PCC.
Where Area EPS design incorporates different equipment and line ratings for the same nominal voltage
level and phase, the kVA rating of equipment on individual upstream line segments may be more limiting
than the kVA rating of the circuit or the substation.
Single-phase DR creates a potential for imbalanced phase currents. Single-phase DR creates zero and
negative sequence currents which may potentially cause voltage imbalances that may adversely impact
other equipment and protective schemes. When applying multiple single-phase DR units on any line
section, Area EPS operators should attempt to balance the DR to limit the phase imbalance. Further study
may be necessary if the imbalance is greater than normal load imbalance found on the line section.
7.4.1.4 Technology-specific consideration
DR does not cause unacceptable phase imbalance.
If the gross nameplate rating of the DR will exceed the nameplate rating of the EPS transformer serving the
facility, or if single-phase DR creates an excessive voltage imbalance, then further study should be
considered to determine if the DR interconnection could exceed the capability of nearby EPS equipment in
the event of a loss of onsite load and could create excessive voltage imbalance for three-phase equipment.
Steady state simulation power flow study (C1) may need to be performed if this sub-criterion is not met.
Technical issues to be considered if this sub-criterion is not met include: equipment ratings as identified by
steady state simulation study (C1), short-circuit analysis (C2.1), and system protection settings (C2).
7.4.2 Sub-criteria ID P3.2Gross kVA rating of aggregate DR on a particular feeder or

substation is no greater than the feeder or substation rating
If a preliminary review determines that additional DR exists on the feeder to the subject DR and the gross
kVA rating of the aggregated DR on the feeder does not exceed the kVA rating of equipment on that
feeder, this sub-criterion is satisfied. Likewise, if a preliminary review determines that additional DR exists
on the substation that the subject DR is fed from and the gross kVA rating of the aggregated DR on the
substation does not exceed the kVA rating of the substation, this sub-criterion is satisfied.
If aggregated DR on a feeder is less than the rated equipment on the feeder, under no load conditions the
DR is unlikely to exceed the rating of the equipment. Likewise, if aggregated DR on a substation is less
than the substation rating, the DR is unlikely to exceed the rating of the substation equipment.
44
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
This sub-criterion applies to all DR interconnections where more than one DR is connected to the feeder or
substation.
Where Area EPS design incorporates different conductor ratings for the same nominal voltage level and
phase, the kVA rating of individual upstream line segments may be more limiting than the kVA rating of
the circuit or the substation.
If the kVA ratings of the aggregated DR exceed the ratings of the feeder or substation, further study should
be considered to determine if the DR interconnection could exceed the rating of the feeder or substation
equipment.
A steady state simulation study (C1) may need to be performed if this criterion is not met.
steady state simulation study (C1), short-circuit analysis (C2.1), and system protection settings (C2).
7.5 Criteria ID P4Impacts on system protection, fault conditions, and arc flash
rating
The addition of DR to the existing system may necessitate changes in protection setting, protection
schemes, and protection equipment. In addition, DR may introduce additional sources of short-circuit
currents affecting the short-circuit duty on EPS equipment, protection settings, and alter the arc flash rating
of the EPS network. DR output may also mask fault currents, interfering with the operation of protective
devices. This criterion is met if all four sub-criteria (P4.1, P4.2, P4.3, and P4.4) are met.
Short-circuit current data may be readily available or reliably estimated from data available. The quality of
the estimate and the degree of accuracy needed will be important in determining whether additional studies
are needed to assess this criterion. The accuracy needed is dependent on the amount of short-circuit current
contributed by the aggregate DR as compared to the short-circuit current contributed by the Area EPS and
the level of Area EPS short-circuit current compared to existing equipment ratings.
7.5.1 Sub-criteria ID P4.1DR cannot cause any protective device or circuit component to
exceed 85% to 90% of the short-circuit interrupting capability
If a preliminary review determines that the DR will not cause any protective device or circuit component to
exceed 85% to 90% of its short-circuit interrupting capability, it can be expected that the DR will have no
significant impact on Area EPS protection and this sub-criterion is satisfied.
45
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
If the resulting fault current with the DR at each protective device and circuit component remains
sufficiently below the devices interrupting capability, it can be expected that the DR will have no
significant impact on Area EPS short-circuit duty, fault detection sensitivity, relay coordination, or fuse
saving schemes. Area EPS operators often establish as a fault duty threshold a share of each devices
interrupting capability; once a system change results in fault current that exceeds that threshold, a circuit or
component upgrade is a potential mitigation technique. The fault duty threshold applied by an Area EPS to
DR interconnections should be the same as the threshold applied to other distribution upgrades.
This sub-criterion applies to all DR. DR interconnections of 11 kVA and below typically have a minimal
impact on fault current levels and may be excluded from this sub-criterion.
Since the circuit with which the DR normally operates in parallel has normal open ties with neighboring
circuits, this sub-criterion needs to be evaluated for those system configurations in which DR could be
served from the neighboring circuits. Also, this sub-criterion needs to be evaluated for adjacent circuits that
are supplied from the source substation low side bus as the circuit to which the DR is normally
interconnected.
Inverter-based DRs are current limited under fault conditions and have relatively low fault current
contribution compared to rotating machines.
If a preliminary review indicates that the DR interconnections fault current contribution may cause one or
more protective devices or circuit components to exceed 85% to 90% of their short-circuit interrupting
capability (or the percentage used by the Area EPS operator for distribution upgrades if different),
additional protection studies specific to the proposed interconnection and short-circuit studies should be
considered.
A short-circuit study (C2.1) and system protection studies (C2) may need to be performed if this sub-
criterion is not met.
steady state simulation (C1), short-circuit analysis (C2.1), system protection settings (C2), and arc flash
hazard study (C2.7).
7.5.2 Sub-criteria ID P4.2Aggregate DR on circuit does not contribute more than 10% of
the circuits maximum fault current at the primary voltage point nearest the PCC
If a preliminary review determines that the DR project when considered with other generation on the circuit
does not contribute more than 10% of the circuits maximum fault current at the primary voltage point
nearest the PCC, there is little chance of the DR interfering with protection coordination and this sub-
criterion is satisfied.
46
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
7.5.2.1 Technical basis for criterion
The DR unit may contribute current to system faults. Depending on the transformer connection
configuration, it may reduce Area EPS system fault contributions to faults and cause mis-coordination such
as failure of fuse saving schemes. This can result in some customer outages that would not occur with the
DR disconnected or may create circumstances where EPS protective equipment does not clear the fault in a
timely manner.
It is generally agreed that there is little chance of increasing Area EPS outages if the proposed DR, in
aggregation with other generation on the distribution circuit, does not contribute more than 10% to the
distribution circuit's maximum fault current at the point on the high-voltage (primary) level nearest the
PCC. This criterion addresses the issues of fault current from the DR not desensitizing protection
equipment on the Area EPS. It also addresses the issue that voltage disturbances that may occur because of
normal or abnormal operation of the DR are not likely to have a significant effect on voltage supplied to
other customers (criteria P4).
The ratio of the DRs fault current to the circuits maximum fault current for a three-phase fault at the
primary voltage point nearest the PCC is sometimes referred to as the short-circuit current contribution
ratio (SCCR).
This sub-criterion applies to all DR. DR interconnections at 11 kVA and below will have a minimal impact
on fault current levels and may be excluded from this sub-criterion.
Typically, inverter-based DRs are unlikely to cause problems related to short-circuit contribution due to
their low fault duty capabilities. For larger three-phase rotating generators requiring more detailed impact
studies, the SCCR also needs to be reviewed.
If a preliminary review determines that the DR project, when considered with other generation on the
circuit, contributes more than 10% of the circuits maximum fault current at the primary voltage point
nearest the PCC, then the DR may interfere with protection coordination and additional protection studies
may be necessary.
A short-circuit study (C2.1) and system protection studies (C2) may need to be performed if this sub-
criterion is not met.
Technical issues to be considered if this sub-criterion is not met include steady state simulation (C1), short-
circuit analysis (C2.1), protection settings (C2), and arc flash hazard study (C2.7).
47
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
7.5.3 Sub-criteria ID P4.3DR will interconnect with an Area EPS having radial topology
If a preliminary review determines that the DR will interconnect with an Area EPS having radial topology,
this sub-criterion is satisfied.
Networked EPS systems are inherently more complex systems than traditional radial systems. Networked
secondary systems are designed to provide maximum reliability. There are typically more protective
relaying devices (network protectors) that a proposed DR interconnection will need to coordinate with. This
is usually not a trivial process.
This sub-criterion applies to any DR interconnection. DR interconnections of 11 kVA and below will have
a minimal impact on fault current levels and may be excluded from this sub-criterion.
Area EPSs that have tight margins on protection coordination may require some preliminary review of
potential protection coordination issues.
If the DR interconnection is in a distribution secondary network, then detailed protection studies should be
considered. As networked secondary systems are designed to provide maximum reliability, there are
typically more protective relaying devices with which a proposed DR interconnection will need to
coordinate. This is usually not a trivial process and therefore more in-depth protection coordination studies
should be considered.
System protection studies (C2) may need to be performed if this sub-criterion is not met.
Technical issues to be considered if this sub-criterion is not met include: automatic restoration coordination
(C2.3), protective device coordination (C2.2), operational characteristics (C3), and system protection (C2).
7.5.4 Sub-criteria ID P4.4DR will not cause temporary overvoltages during a phase-to-
ground fault
If a preliminary review determines that there is no risk of temporary overvoltages to the Area EPS and
other customers due to loss of system neutral grounding, this sub-criterion is satisfied. For the risk of
temporary overvoltages due to loss of system neutral grounding to be null, one of the following grounding
configurations need to be implemented:
The DR is connected using a three-phase, three-wire configuration.

The DR is connected on a single-phase distribution transformer and connected line-to-neutral.
48
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
The DR is connected to a three-phase, four-wire system and is effectively grounded, or DR peak

power is less than 10% of minimum load of smallest Area EPS section.
Based on the type of interconnection to be used for the DR, the Area EPS operator will determine from
Table 2 if the proposed DR passes the sub-criterion after identifying the primary distribution line
configuration that will serve the DR.
Table 2 Primary distribution interconnection sub-criterion

Primary distribution Type of interconnection Results/Criteria
1-phase, line-to-neutral Any type Pass sub-criterion
3-phase, 3-wire Any type Pass sub-criterion
3-phase, 4-wire Effectively grounded Pass sub-criterion
3-phase, 4-wire Floating and DR facility peak power is less than 10% of Pass sub-criterion
minimum load of smallest Area EPS section.
3-phase, 4-wire Floating and DR facility peak power is greater than 10% of Fail sub-criterion
minimum load of smallest Area EPS section.
NOTEIf distribution system is a 3-phase, 3-wire section of a 3-phase, 4-wire circuit, the pertinent table entry for 3-
phase, 4-wire primary distribution should be used.
When a DR is connected using 3 phases and 4 wires in an effectively grounded manner, the ratio of the
zero sequence reactance to positive sequence reactance (X0/X1 ratio) needs to be considered so temporary
overvoltages will not be caused by phase-to-ground faults. Additional guidance on grounding may be found
in IEEE Std C62.92.1 [B10]. For floating connections, temporary overvoltages are an issue. When the
DR is very small (e.g., when its peak production is less than 10% of the minimum load), the load will be
large enough to limit temporary overvoltages.
This sub-criterion applies to all DRs including inverter-based DR interconnections incorporating anti-
islanding protective features.
DR interconnections of 11 kVA and below will have a minimal impact on any potential line overvoltages
from loss of system neutral grounding and may be excluded from this sub-criterion.
such as those identified in 11.4.1.4.
DR interconnections with anti-islanding protection and without direct sensing of Area EPS faults in
locations of the Area EPS with system neutral grounding may, in the event of a loss of system neutral
grounding, fail to separate quickly enough to avoid an overvoltage condition. These overvoltage conditions
may persist until after the faults are detected and isolated by Area EPS protective devices.
49
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
If the DR interconnection does not pass this sub-criterion, more detailed impact studies should be
considered to assess the risk of post-fault overvoltage or an unintended island due to the DR or to identify
additional measures for post-fault separation.
A system protection study (C2) may need to be performed if this sub-criterion is not met.
Technical issues to be considered if this sub-criterion is not met include: automatic restoration coordination
(C2.3), protective device coordination (C2.2), system protection (C2), and system grounding (S3.4).
7.5.5 Sub-criteria ID P4.5Existing protection schemes are configured to allow for DR

connected to the Area EPS
This sub-criterion is satisfied if a preliminary review determines that existing protection schemes allow for
the addition of DR of the size and type similar to the proposed project(s), existing settings are unaffected by
the addition of DR, and other preliminary review sub-criterion do not state that additional protection studies
should be considered.
This may be the case when DR is already connected to the feeder for new DR and the new DR is not
substantially larger than the existing DR. If special equipment was required to communicate with the
existing DR for purposes of protection, similar equipment may be needed for the new DR.
Sometimes changes to protection schemes are needed with the addition of DR. A quick review of
protection schemes in use on the Area EPS will often determine whether any of these schemes conflict with
changes to Area EPS operation due to changes in power flow, fault contribution, ground fault sources, and
Area EPS standard practices. If DR already exists on the Area EPS and the DR being added is not
substantially larger, the existing protection schemes are often sufficient. If DR does not presently exist on
the feeder, but simple protection schemes are in use, and the DR has sufficient anti-islanding capability,
further analysis of the protection schemes is usually not needed.
This sub-criterion applies to all DR interconnections incorporating all DR technologies.
Existing protection systems that have been designed with future DR applications in mind have a high
likelihood of allowing the addition of DR, with appropriate anti-islanding schemes, with only a preliminary
review of the protection systems. Likewise, simple protection systems (i.e., overcurrent only) with the
addition of DR with anti-islanding protection systems will have a high likelihood of only a preliminary
review of protection systems. However, more in-depth protection studies should be considered for more
complex protection systems (i.e., transfer trip schemes, multi-layered setting, automatic restoration, multi-
ground point protection).
50
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
If the DR interconnection does not pass this sub-criterion, more detailed impact studies should be
considered to determine the appropriate protection schemes and settings.
A system protection study (C2) may need to be performed if this sub-criterion is not met.
Technical issues to be considered if this sub-criterion is not met include: circuit automatic restoration
coordination (C2.3), protective device coordination (C2.2), and system protection (C2).
7.6 Criteria ID P5Impacts on voltage regulation within the EPS under steady
state conditions
DR may create circumstances where voltage regulation requirements are violated. This sub-criterion is met
if each of the sub-criteria P5.1, P5.2, P5.3, and P5.4 are met and criterion P5.5 is met if applicable.
7.6.1 Sub-criteria ID P5.1DR PCC is relatively strong or stiff location within the Area EPS
If a preliminary review indicates that the PCC of the DR is a relatively strong or stiff location within the
Area EPS, the Area EPS has the ability to resist voltage deviations caused by the DR, and the DR will not
adversely affect Area EPS voltage for other Area EPS customers and this sub-criterion is satisfied.
System stiffness or weakness refers to the ability of the Area EPS at a particular point to resist voltage
deviations from a DR connected at that point. Where this sub-criterion is met, the Area EPS is capable of
resisting voltage deviations from the DR such that other customers are not adversely affected. System
stiffness or weakness at a particular point within the Area EPS is indicated by the total impedance of the
Area EPS between the primary or strong source (e.g., a substation) and that point. A given DR
interconnected at a point in the Area EPS where the total impedance is high (e.g., a weak or non-stiff
location) will cause greater voltage deviations in the Area EPS, and there is greater potential for voltage-
related impacts from the DR in the Area EPS such as flicker, voltage fluctuations, or changes in steady
state voltage. As explained in Clause 5, there are several ways to measure and compare system weakness or
stiffness at the PCC of a DR. Any measure of system stiffness or weakness should be based on the total
system impedance between the primary source and the proposed PCC of the DR. Ideally the measure
should also consider the size of the DR as well. Numerical values for locations that are sufficiently stiff or
strong to meet this sub-criterion will depend on the computational method used and may vary from Area
EPS to Area EPS.
This sub-criterion applies to any DR interconnection designed to export power to the Area EPS over the
PCC.
The effective weakness or stiffness of the Area EPS will vary from point to point; accordingly, this
criterion should be applied at the specific location within the Area EPS where the DR is proposed for
interconnection. Interconnections near the end of long radial circuits or in weak island systems are classic
51
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
examples of weak or non-stiff DR interconnections having elevated potential for voltage-related impacts.
Where the Area EPS incorporates voltage regulation features such as load tap changers, line voltage
regulators, or capacitors capable of responding to voltage variation, the Area EPS may be more capable of
interconnecting a particular DR without voltage concerns and without detailed studies. However, the
settings of these voltage regulation controls need to be adjusted to take into account the effects of DR. The
operation of the DR should not cause the Area EPS voltage regulation devices to operate excessively,
potentially causing a shortened life for these devices.
Where stiffness is evaluated using the short-circuit contribution of the DR, as in a stiffness ratio as defined
in IEEE Std 1547.2, this may distort comparisons of stiffness or weakness between DRs with high short-
circuit contribution such as synchronous generators and DRs with relatively low short-circuit contribution
such as inverter-based generation.
If, based on a preliminary review, the DR interconnection is in a weak or non-stiff location within the Area
EPS, additional studies should be considered to directly assess the Area EPS voltage impacts of the DR.
A steady state simulation (C1) study should be considered if this sub-criterion is not met. These studies
may potentially lead to special impact studies including quasi-static simulation (S1), dynamic simulation
(S2), and electromagnetic transient simulation (S3).
Technical issues to be considered if this sub-criterion is not met include: operational characteristics (C3)
and considerations such as voltage imbalance, voltage regulation, temporary overvoltage, voltage
fluctuations, and voltage sags and swells (C1).
7.6.2 Sub-criteria ID P5.2DR would not be anticipated to result in voltage rising above
specified limits in the Area EPS
If a preliminary review predicts that the aggregated DR production will not directly cause voltages in the
EPS to rise above specified limits, it is likely the DR will not adversely affect power quality (delivery
voltage) for other Area EPS customers, and this sub-criterion is satisfied.
Injection of active power from DR into the distribution system within the Area EPS under normal operating
conditions offsets factors that normally contribute to voltage drop along a radial. This sub-criterion
addresses the capability of the voltage control mechanisms within the Area EPS, along with any voltage
regulation features of the DR, to compensate for this effect. Where this sub-criterion is met, the impact of
the DR lies within the voltage control range of the Area EPS.
PCC.
52
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
regulators, or capacitors capable of responding to voltage variation, the Area EPS may be more capable of
interconnecting a particular DR without voltage concerns and without detailed studies. However, the
potentially causing a shortened life for these devices. Also, for bus regulated substations with multiple
feeders, the voltage regulation impact on the non-DR feeder(s) needs to be considered.
Some inverter-based generation may be limited to operation at a unity power factor and thus may lack the
ability to compensate for its voltage rise impact. This may limit the amount of aggregate inverter-based DR
that can interconnect with an Area EPS while meeting this sub-criterion.
If, based on a preliminary review the DR, interconnection is expected to cause normal condition or steady-
state voltage rise in the Area EPS that results in EPS voltage above normal specifications, additional studies
should be considered to augment or reconfigure Area EPS voltage regulation features to compensate.
and considerations such as voltage imbalance, voltage regulation, temporary overvoltage, voltage
7.6.3 Sub-criteria ID P5.3Loss of DR or variation in output of DR would not be anticipated

to result in voltage in the Area EPS falling below specified limits
If a preliminary review predicts that the loss of, or variation in, DR production will not directly cause
voltages in the EPS to fall below specified limits, it is likely the DR will not adversely affect power quality
(delivery voltage) for other Area EPS customers, and this sub-criterion is satisfied.
The loss of or reduction in active power injection from DR into the distribution system within the Area EPS
contributes to factors that normally result in voltage drop along a radial line. DR production may be lost to
the Area EPS due to dispatch decisions, DR outages, or changes in conditions affecting the capability of the
DR. This sub-criterion addresses the capability of the voltage control mechanisms within the Area EPS,
along with any voltage regulation features of the DR, to compensate for this effect. Where this sub-criterion
is met, the impact of the DR lies within the voltage control range of the Area EPS.
This sub-criterion applies to any DR interconnection designed to export to the Area EPS over the PCC.
This sub-criterion is particularly applicable to DR: a) whose output may be expected to vary under normal
53
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
operating conditions, such as DR with solar or wind primary energy sources, and b) using interconnection
technology with a fixed power factor.
Dispatchable DR such as synchronous or inductive generation or storage that is not subject to continuously
varying output or that has voltage compensation features may be excluded from this sub-criterion.
regulators, or capacitors capable of responding to voltage variation, the Area EPS may be capable of
compensating for the loss of the DR without voltage concerns and without detailed studies. However, the
potentially causing a shortened life for these devices.
Generation with a solar primary energy source, for example PV, is subject to unpredictable, relatively rapid
output changes due to changes in solar radiation. More importantly, multiple PV projects may
simultaneously experience output reductions due to a common factor such as a cloud passing or a system
voltage deviation event. Studies of PV output variability for individual large-scale PV projects indicate
short-duration output transients over one minute of 39% or less of ac nameplate output for 90% of days,
and a maximum observed of 50% of output over one minute for all days. Sustained transients such as at
sunrise and sunset were observed at 10% to 13% of output over 15 minutes. [B5]
Accordingly, the application of this sub-criterion should consider not only the steady state impact of the
loss of an individual DR, but the aggregate impacts of nearby PV projects, and the quasi-dynamic
phenomena such as the rate at which voltage regulating devices such as voltage regulators can respond to
voltage changes. In addition, PV generation as inverter-based may be limited to operation at a unity power
factor, and thus may lack the ability to compensate for its voltage reduction impact. These attributes of PV
generation may limit the amount of aggregate PV that can interconnect with an Area EPS while meeting
this sub-criterion.
such as those identified in 11.4.1.1 and 11.4.1.2.
If, based on a preliminary review, loss of or expected variation in the output of the proposed DR
interconnection is expected to cause voltage drop in the Area EPS that results in EPS voltage below normal
specifications, additional studies should be considered to augment or reconfigure Area EPS voltage
regulation features to compensate.
For projects with a solar primary energy source, the presence of additional nearby solar DR
interconnections having the potential to respond simultaneously to an external factor, such as a cloud
passing, may necessitate additional study. Similarly, for projects with wind as a primary energy source, the
presence of additional nearby wind turbine interconnections that have the potential to respond almost
simultaneously to large changes in wind speed may necessitate additional study.
54
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Technical issues to be considered if this sub-criterion is not met include: operational characteristics (C3),
and voltage considerations such as voltage imbalance, voltage regulation, temporary overvoltage, voltage
7.6.4 Sub-criteria ID P5.4Variation in output of DR would not be anticipated to

necessitate changes of settings of Area EPS voltage regulating devices
If a preliminary review determines that the maximum voltage change at voltage regulating devices (e.g.,
voltage regulators, tap changers, and automatic switched capacitors) caused by the DR production is less
than the regulating device dead band, and the DR cannot cause reverse power flow at the voltage regulation
device, this sub-criterion is satisfied. Reversing regulation may have unanticipated results when the DR is
weak relative to the system.
Setting changes may be necessary due to larger magnitude of voltage changes sensed or direction of power
flow through voltage regulation equipment. In some instances, consideration of bidirectional capability of
voltage regulation equipment may necessitate equipment modification or replacement.
Variable injection of active power from DR into the distribution system within the Area EPS variably
offsets or contributes to factors that normally contribute to voltage drop along a radial feeder. This sub-
criterion addresses the increased duty placed upon the voltage control mechanisms within the Area EPS,
along with any voltage regulation features of the DR, to compensate for any unpredictable output variation
of the DR. Area EPS operators often set desired operations-per-day limits on voltage-regulating devices to
reduce the chances of premature failure, which in turn affects power quality for all customers of the Area
EPS. Where this sub-criterion is met, the impact of the DR is small enough that a change in its output alone
does not directly trigger a change in Area EPS voltage controls, thus the DR cannot incrementally
contribute to premature failure of Area EPS voltage control elements.
PCC. This sub-criterion is particularly applicable to DR whose output may be expected to vary under
normal operating conditions, such as DR with solar or wind primary energy sources, and using
interconnection technology with a fixed power factor.
varying output or has voltage compensation features may be excluded from this sub-criterion.
PV generation is subject to unpredictable, relatively large output changes due to changes in solar radiation.
Further, under partly-cloudy conditions PV output may fluctuate repeatedly over an extended period of
time, contributing to a much less stable operating environment for voltage control equipment than may
have been intended. In addition, PV generation may be limited to operation at a unity power factor, and
may therefore lack the ability to compensate for its voltage variation impact. These attributes of PV
55
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
generation may limit the amount of aggregate PV that can interconnect with an Area EPS while meeting
this sub-criterion.
If the DR has the potential to cause reverse power flow through voltage regulators with line drop
compensation, additional study efforts may be needed. Reverse power flow through this type of voltage
regulator may create worse voltage profiles than those found from voltage regulators without line drop
compensation.
such as those identified in 11.4.1.1 and 11.4.1.2.
If a preliminary review indicates that the expected variation in production of a proposed DR has a sufficient
voltage impact to directly result in changes in the settings of Area EPS voltage regulating devices,
additional studies should be considered to augment or reconfigure Area EPS voltage regulation features to
compensate.
7.6.5 Sub-criteria ID P5.5DR is not expected to result in high voltage on shared

secondary
If a preliminary review determines that the output of the DR or the aggregate output of DR on the shared
secondary will not directly result in voltage exceeding acceptable service limits, further studies and voltage
management on the secondary may not be needed.
Service transformers typically operate with secondary voltage at a fixed ratio relative to the Area EPS
primary voltage seen by the transformer, that is, without any active management of secondary voltage. The
output of DR within the secondary, particularly DR with a fixed, unity power factor such as inverter-based
PV, may increase secondary voltage if low load within the secondary coincides with high DR output.
Under these circumstances customers within the secondary other than the DR host may experience delivery
voltage outside of accepted specifications.
This sub-criterion applies only to DR interconnections on shared secondaries where the DR also lacks
voltage regulation or compensation features, such as inverter-based DR with a fixed unity power factor.
56
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Single-phase PV DR on shared secondaries where the DR is non-dispatchable, inverter-based operating at a

fixed unity power factor has essentially no features to provide compensation for voltage variation within
the secondary. Multiple PV projects within a single secondary with common operating profiles may
exacerbate voltage variability or out-of-specification delivery voltages within the secondary.
If a preliminary review indicates that the output of the DR or the aggregate output of all DR on the
secondary will result in voltage within the secondary exceeding acceptable limits, further studies should be
considered.
If this sub-criterion is not met, then consideration could also be given to mitigation techniques such as
those identified in Clause 11.
7.7 Criteria ID P6Impacts on EPS power quality
Rapid fluctuation or loss of output from the proposed DR interconnection may cause voltage sag/swell or
flicker. DR may introduce unacceptable harmonic distortion. This sub-criterion is met if each of the sub-
criteria P6.1, P6.2, and P6.3 are met.
7.7.1 Sub-criteria ID P6.1DR operation will not cause flicker exceeding limits at the PCC
If a preliminary review determines that the DR will not cause the Pst (short term flicker value) to exceed
0.9 when starting and during normal operation at the PCC, it is likely that the DR will not result in
objectionable flicker for other Area EPS customers and this sub-criterion is satisfied.
The DR shall not create objectionable flicker for other customers on the Area EPS (see 4.3.2 of IEEE Std
1547). For example, flicker at the PCC caused by the generating facility should not exceed the limits
defined by IEEE Std 1453 and IEEE Std 1453.1. This approach provides guidance toward meeting the
requirements in 4.3.2 of IEEE Std 1547.
This sub-criterion applies to any DR interconnection.
57
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Synchronous generators may be connected and brought up to synchronous speed (as an induction motor)
resulting in starting voltage drop. This is permissible provided flicker limits are not exceeded.
Starting voltage drop is typically not a concern when the DR is inverter-based. However, a high number of
changes in levels of energy produced in a short period of time may create voltage changes that violate
flicker sub-criterion. Both solar and wind turbines have the potential to have quick changes in output
energy. For example, for PV generation an output change of 40% to 50% within 30 seconds is possible
[B5]. If the generation is connected at an EPS location where such an output change results in an EPS
voltage change of 1.7% or more, flicker could be a concern. The susceptibility of the energy-producing
technology to these types of quick energy level changes needs to be considered.
If a preliminary review determines that the starting voltage drop of a DR at the PCC may exceed the limits
defined by maximum borderline of irritation curve, the DR may result in objectionable flicker for other
Area EPS customers and additional study should be considered.
Steady state simulation (C1) and short-circuit analysis studies (C2.1) should be considered if this sub-
criterion is not met. These studies may potentially lead to special impact studies including dynamic
simulation (S2) or electromagnetic transient simulation (S3).
Technical issues to be considered if this sub-criterion is not met include: voltage regulation, flicker,
temporary overvoltage, and voltage fluctuations (C1), as well as voltage flicker (S4.4).
7.7.2 Sub-criteria ID P6.2Real and reactive power flow from DR will not cause Area EPS
voltage sags and swells
If a preliminary review determines that the voltage sags and swells due to the real and reactive power flow
from the DR independent of line voltage regulating equipment will not exceed acceptable Area EPS
distribution level variations, further analysis of power quality voltage variations may not be necessary.
IEEE Std 1159-2009 [B7] defines a voltage sag or swell as, respectively, a short-duration decrease in
root-mean-square (rms) voltage to between 0.90 per unit (PU) and 0.10 PU, or a short-duration increase in
rms voltage to between 1.10 PU and 1.80 PU.
Variable injection of active and reactive power from DR into the distribution system within the Area EPS
variably offsets or contributes to factors that normally contribute to voltage drop along a radial. This sub-
criterion addresses the potential for voltages exceeding normal voltage ranges. Where the expected output
variation of the DR will not result in voltage changes, the impact of the DR is small enough to not directly
cause sags and swells. Alternatively, if expected variation in the output of the DR may result in large
enough voltage changes to cause sags or swells (e.g., a voltage change of 0.10 PU or more), further studies
should be considered so the circuit does not experience voltage sags or swells due to the DR.
58
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
This sub-criterion applies to DR interconnections designed to export power to the Area EPS over the PCC.
This sub-criterion is particularly applicable to DR: a) whose output may be expected to vary under normal
operating conditions, such as DR with solar or wind primary energy sources, and b) using interconnection
technology with a fixed power factor.
varying output or has voltage compensation features may be excluded from this sub-criterion.
If a preliminary review indicates that the expected variation in production of a proposed DR has a sufficient
voltage impact to directly result in changes in the settings of Area EPS voltage regulating devices,
additional studies should be considered.
Technical issues to be considered if this sub-criterion is not met include: operational characteristics (Study
C3) and voltage considerations such as voltage imbalance, voltage regulation, temporary overvoltage,
voltage fluctuations, and voltage sags and swells (C1).
If this sub-criterion is not met, then consideration should also be given to mitigation techniques such as
those identified in 11.4.1.1 and 11.4.1.2.
7.7.3 Sub-criteria ID P6.3DR operation will not cause harmonics at the PCC to exceed
allowed limits
This sub-criterion is satisfied if a preliminary review determines that the harmonic generation from the DR
meets IEEE Std 1547 requirements and the harmonic levels and SCCR at the PCC are low; thus it is
unlikely that the addition of DR will create harmonics in excess of the levels identified in IEEE Std
1547.
At the PCC, the harmonic levels are due to the harmonics from the system plus the harmonics injected by
the DR. If the injected harmonics are low, changes to the harmonic levels will be low. The capacity of the
DR to impact harmonic voltage levels at the PCC also depends on the SCCR. If the Area EPS is strong
relative to the DR size (low SCCR), the DR will have little impact on the voltage harmonics at the PCC.
IEEE Std 1547, not IEEE Std 519, establishes harmonic limits for DR interconnection.
59
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
This sub-criterion applies to any DR interconnection with standard transformer connections and system
grounding. DR connected to systems with large amounts of power factor correction capacitors should be
considered for study for potential resonances if the amount of harmonics injected by the DR approaches the
limits identified in IEEE Std 1547.
Capacitive reactance, inductive reactance, and background harmonic levels will have an effect on the level
of harmonics produced when harmonic-producing DR is connected. The net level of harmonics is
exacerbated by resonances throughout the distribution system. Resonances created by capacitance and
impedances should be considered if background harmonics are high and the DR produces substantial (in
terms of percentage of current harmonic levels) harmonics.
If the proposed DR interconnection is at a location with large background harmonic levels and the proposed
DR may produce substantial levels of harmonics, a harmonic analysis (S4.1), harmonic problems (S4.2), or
harmonic resonance (S4.3) should be considered.
8. Conventional distribution studies
8.1 Introduction
In general, a large DR or a large number of small DR may cause the Area EPS to experience voltage
excursions, overload, equipment misoperations, protection and coordination issues, and power quality
issues. When the proposed DR interconnection exceeds preliminary review criteria limits, the DR may be
examined using conventional study methods discussed in this clause. The tools used in these studies are
generally familiar to Area EPS operating and planning personnel.
Results of these studies may show that the impact of the DR on the Area EPS is acceptable, they may
indicate that mitigations should be considered for the Area EPS to approve the installation of the DR, or
they may indicate that more complex, special studies should be considered. Table 3 shows the different
conventional system impact studies and their relationship to potential system impacts on the Area EPS,
along with a clause number reference.
60
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Table 3 Type of study vs potential impact on the EPS

Impact Study Clause Un- Area EPS Protection Voltage Power
study type ID intentional equipment design, regulation and quality
islanding duty and coordination reactive
operating and fault power
ratings rating management
Steady state C1 8.2 X X X
simulation
System protection C2 8.3 X X X X
studies
Short-circuit analysis C2.1 8.3.1 X X X X
Protective device C2.2 8.3.2 X X X X
coordination
Automatic restoration C2.3 8.3.3 X X X
coordination
Area EPS power C2.4 8.3.4 X X
system grounding
Synchronization C2.5 8.3.5 X X
Unintentional C2.6 8.3.6 X X
islanding
Arc flash hazard C2.7 8.3.7 X
study
Operational C3 8.4 X X X X
characteristics
loading, load
shedding, etc.
8.2 Study ID C1Steady state simulation
8.2.1 Technical basis for the study
A conventional steady state simulation may be performed when the preliminary review indicates that the
proposed DR interconnection has the potential to cause the Area EPS to experience equipment overloads,
sustained overvoltage conditions, excessive voltage fluctuations, or equipment control problems. Steady
state simulations are also the basis for short-circuit studies and other protection studies.
8.2.2 Study methodology
A steady state simulation tool, generally referred to as a power flow simulation, solves a snapshot of an
EPS model using an EPS model at the nominal EPS frequency. In their most basic form, these tools solve
voltages, currents, and real and reactive power flows and losses throughout the Area EPS at a single point
in time. Some steady state simulation tools solve only Area EPS models limited to one power source in a
radial configuration. These tools are therefore not appropriate for DR studies. To study the impact of DR on
the Area EPS, the steady state simulation tools used need to support multiple power sources and Area EPS
architectures other than radial.
Most Area EPS operators have a topological model of their respective system that includes the distribution
circuit of the proposed interconnection and substation source. Since it takes time and effort to model the
system and keep them up to date, some Area EPS operators may not have their entire system modeled. The
power flows are done on an as-needed basis. Ideally, the scope of the model should be sufficient to assess
possible impacts beyond the individual distribution feeder, including neighboring circuits, the substation,
and the Area EPS serving the substation. But some programs are designed to simulate individual circuits
only. When procuring a new tool to accommodate distributed generation, the model should include
capacitor control settings and tap changer control settings to assess the impact of DR on system voltage
61
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
with and without voltage regulating devices. The model should incorporate loads expected for periods in
which the DR would be operating. Existing programs may not have these capabilities. The Area EPS
operator with older tools may need to assess the cost and benefits of replacing the tool. Note that previously
approved DR should be included in the Area EPS model.
A variety of commercial and open source steady state simulation tools are available. Many of these tools
provide toolboxes and analysis packages designed to facilitate commonly performed studies. When
selecting a steady state simulation tool for DR impact analysis to supplement or replace an existing load
flow program some functions that may be useful are:
Unbalanced solution
Availability of DR models
Distribution transformer and secondary models
Ability to solve loops and meshed networks
Availability of additional types of load models (constant current, constant kVA, etc.)
For the purposes of a power flow study, a DR installation can be represented, as appropriate, by one of the
following:
A fixed source of real and reactive power. Preferred for conventional studies.
A fixed source of real power with a fixed power factor. A possible solution if large voltage
fluctuations are found.
A fixed source of real power, providing ac bus voltage control to a set level (subject to limits on
reactive power output). A DR designed to operate in this manner would generally not be approved
in a conventional study.
A swing generator in a stand-alone power system, providing control of ac bus voltage, frequency,
and phase angle (subject to limits on real and reactive power output). This type of model would
generally be used to model a microgrid in which the DR would be designed to provide service to
select loads on the Area EPS as discussed in IEEE Std 1547.4, which is beyond the scope of this
document.
The information needed to model a DR installation in a power flow study is contained in the basic
equipment rating and the description of the available operating modes. Parameterized models of
conventional synchronous generators are commonly available in the libraries of leading power flow
analysis programs. These models can readily be adapted to represent other types of DR installation if the
libraries do not include specific models for these particular types.
In these studies, several types of concerns may arise as follows:
Excessive voltage rise. The installation of DR on the circuits of the Area EPS may prove to be
acceptable under peak loading conditions, but the reverse flow of power may cause a rise in the
voltage that exceeds acceptable limits under light loading conditions. Modeling both peak and light
load conditions protects against this contingency. Note that the operating schedule of the DR may
affect the minimum conditions to be studied. Solar DR units, for instance, would be studied under
the lowest daylight loading conditions. The scope of the power flow study should include the low-
voltage equivalents to determine the impacts on the power quality at the equivalent customer
terminals and to be capable of analyzing the performance of the DR connected to the low-voltage
circuits. Where the service transformers and the low-voltage secondary service cables are not
modeled, the studies may fail to detect overvoltages at the Local EPS caused by the impedance of
the low-voltage circuit. Overvoltages are most likely to occur when the DR is injecting into the
Area EPS. Overvoltage may also occur when the Area EPS is operating near the voltage limit prior
to the DR operation and the DR may push the voltage over the limit.
62
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Excessive voltage fluctuations. The installation of intermittent types of DR, such as PV and wind
units, may cause voltage fluctuations that become noticeable or irritating to other customers in the
Area EPS. Circuit voltage is controlled with mechanical equipment, voltage regulators, and
capacitor banks that may experience increased numbers of operations, causing increased
maintenance or premature failure. The DR output may fluctuate more rapidly than the Area EPS
control equipment can operate. To model this in the power flow simulation, the voltage regulating
equipment can be locked and the generation can be removed from the case to model the Area EPS
before the voltage regulating equipment can react to the system change.
Improper operations. The installation of DR on circuits may create reverse flow conditions that
cause some types of equipment to operate incorrectly. Some voltage regulating equipment may be
designed to operate as though power flows from the direction of the line side (source of stable
voltage). Where DR causes a reversal of power flow through this equipment, the equipment may
adjust the voltage improperly. This condition may not be present under peak load conditions but
may occur under light load conditions. Many manufacturers have developed control schemes for
their equipment that operate correctly under reverse power flow conditions. Capacitor controls may
also be affected by the installation of DR on the circuits.
Incorrect situational awareness. When significant amounts of DR are installed on a circuit, circuit
metering should be examined to determine whether reverse power flow would be identified in
readings provided to the system operators. This condition may not be present under peak load
conditions but may occur under light load conditions. The metering equipment may need to be
replaced or modified to capture bi-directional flow. Additionally, DR can mask the true load on a
circuit by reducing the amount of forward power flow as seen by system operators.
Equipment overloads. The installation of DR that is significantly larger than the local load in the
Area EPS may cause equipment overloads. These overloads may occur at times other than the peak
load conditions.
Unbalanced operation.The installation of DR at a location in the Area EPS with significant phase
imbalances may cause voltage imbalances on the generator terminals. Installation of single-phase
DR may increase the imbalances, which may adversely impact other devices connected to the Area
EPS circuits. Modeling single-phase DR or three-phase DR on unbalanced circuits using a three-
phase power flow analysis tool (capable of unbalanced calculations) may identify complications
that arise on the circuit.
For violations of the above, mitigation techniques should be considered along with results that may arise
from the power flow, protection, and the short-circuit studies.
8.2.3 Potential further studies
If the conventional steady state simulation (power flow study) shows indications of equipment overloads,
sustained overvoltage conditions, excessive voltage fluctuations, or equipment control problems, a quasi-
static simulation (S1), as described in the Special Studies section, should be considered to confirm the
steady state results or to analyze corrective measures. Operating strategies of the DR may also lead to
special studies.
8.3 Study ID C2System protection studies
The purpose of system protection studies is to assure that the integrity of the electrical system and the
effectiveness of protection devices is maintained despite changes to the distribution system due to the
addition of DR. The system protection study attempts to meet that purpose by portraying the appropriate
protective devices and device settings to properly protect the Area EPS during fault conditions.
63
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
The DR type and characteristics are important considerations when performing protection studies. The
knowledge of energy sources (e.g., engine, wind, solar, etc.) and interface to the power system (e.g.,
synchronous machine, induction machine, inverter, etc.) as well as the knowledge of grounding
characteristics and interconnection transformer configuration are critical to perform the protection study.
The DRs normal operating characteristics (e.g., generation levels and variability) as well as fault or open
circuit characteristics are an important part of the protection study. When multiple DRs are located on the
same feeder or area the protection study needs to consider the multitude of possibilities from the various
combinations of DR operations.
Protective devices such as circuit breakers and fuses are located throughout the electrical power system for
reliable and safe operation. Various types of protection issues may occur in an electrical power system.
Many of these protection issues can be handled by a single protective device or several protective devices
operating in alliance with each other. Because of the large amount of damage that may occur due to the
failure of a protective device to operate properly, most protective devices need to be backed up by other
protective devices.
Protection studies require a variety of other types of studies as prerequisites. System protection studies start
with power flow and short-circuit studies of the relevant portion of the area electrical power system. These
studies provide the basic information for analyzing the reaction under differing fault considerations and
pre-fault (load) conditions.
A system protection study looks at the entire protection scheme including several categories of studies that
are covered below.
8.3.1 Study ID C2.1Short-circuit analysis
8.3.1.1 Technical basis for the study
DR may substantially increase fault current levels at nearby substations as well at other locations in the
distribution system. Increased fault currents may exceed existing equipment ratings, interrupting ratings,
and/or through fault ratings as well as cause potential mis-coordination of existing protective devices.
Hence the DR needs to be modeled in a fault study computer program along with the existing distribution
circuit models and different fault simulations performed in order to determine the fault current levels for
proper protection coordination and relay settings.
8.3.1.2 Study methodology
Short-circuit analysis utilizes a fault study program and studies the effect of three-phase, line-to-ground,
line-to-line, and line-to-line-to-ground faults on electrical distribution systems. The short-circuit study
typically calculates the total short-circuit currents as well as the contributions of individual motors,
generators, and Area EPS ties in the system. These short-circuit current values are important for rating
circuit breakers and designing properly coordinated protection schemes. The short-circuit study feeds into
the protective device coordination and arc flash hazard studies.
For DR impact studies, it is important that the DR short-circuit contribution be properly represented. Some
DR technologies do not behave like classical synchronous generators or induction machines, which most
commercial short-circuit analysis packages can handle. The voltages during short-circuit conditions can be
used to estimate voltage sag magnitudes experienced by other customers, including any effects of the DR.
Consideration has to be given, in the case of a synchronous generator, to the fault current decrement related
to the transitions from the subtransient state to the transient state and should include synchronous
impedance, excitation response, and the dc offset in the fault current as this impacts upon the coordination
64
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
of the fault protection equipment. The classical method for short-circuit analysis uses the Thevenin
equivalent of the power system while modeling different fault locations. For unbalanced faults,
symmetrical components are used to obtain a solution. This involves the derivation of equivalent
impedance networks for positive, negative, and zero sequence currents respectively. The associated
Thevenin voltages are obtained from the voltage at the fault location prior to the fault. The three equivalent
sequence networks are interconnected differently for each of the four fault types and solved to obtain the
respective fault currents.
The equivalent impedance networks used for short-circuit analysis are generally obtained by utilizing the
respective equivalent equipment impedances in the system and neglecting shunt-connected capacitors and
static loads.
The solution method is based on constant-frequency steady-state circuit analysis, so dc offset effect is not
represented. Correction factors need to be applied to obtain asymmetrical fault currents.
In the case of synchronous machine-based generators, the study can be repeated using sub-transient,
transient, and synchronous impedances respectively to obtain the fault current during different time
intervals after the onset of the fault, depending on whether the analysis is to be used for equipment
overstress assessment or instantaneous and time overcurrent relay coordination. During the modeling of the
DG for the short-circuit analysis, the existing power system model is kept as is. Only the DG generator
impedances are changed for the different conditions. So, the system generator models are still using
subtransient impedances even though the DG impedances are being changed for the various conditions. The
implicit assumption is that the system is almost an infinite bus relative to the DG and the system generator
impedance values will not change by any significant amount during the distribution fault.
The short-circuit current from inverter-based DR installations is generally limited to slightly more than
nominal rated current. This is done using active control methods in order to protect the semi-conductor
switching devices in the inverter. Some short-circuit programs now have inverter models, which better
represent inverter-based DR. Short-circuit simulation of inverter-based DR can also be done with a time-
domain model, but this is usually not necessary or practical for protection studies. In the absence of
adequate inverter models, a classical synchronous source is often used with equivalent impedance to
simulate the short-circuit contribution from the inverter.
8.3.2 Study ID C2.2Protective device coordination
The existing protection system was coordinated to ensure that the device closest to the fault isolates the
fault and that the least amount of customers will be impacted for a fault on the system. Adding DR on the
feeder changes the fault current distribution, and the existing protection coordination needs to be checked
to verify that the coordination is still satisfactory. In the event mis-coordination exists, new settings/devices
need to be identified.
The operating times under different fault conditions for all devices need to be checked. Sufficient time
margin between the devices needs to be present to ensure that the appropriate device, typically the device
closest to the fault, operates first.
Protective device coordination studies assure that different protective devices are coordinated in such a way
to assure the best trade-off between high speed protection, reliable operation, and selectivity of the
protective relays. In order to provide optimum protection, each protective device needs to be coordinated
65
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
with other protective devices to assure that the maximum safety, reliability, and selectivity is achieved. In
this way, a minimum number of end customers will be affected by problems in the electrical power
systems, and safety will be maximized.
The fundamental protective device used on the distribution system is non-directional overcurrent
protection. Overcurrent protection at the substation and DR are typically devices that sense a proportion of
the current flowing through the circuit and typically will trip a breaker. These devices will sense phase
current as well as a derived or actually measured ground current. Fuses are single-phase protective devices
that will open a phase of the circuit when the current exceeds clearing characteristics. Some Area EPS
operators use fuse-saving schemes where an upstream automatic restoration device will attempt to trip and
clear temporary faults before the fuse melts. If not done properly, fuse saving schemes may lead to
damaged fuses and the fuse blowing on load later.
The protective overcurrent settings and fuse application needs to take into account maximum and minimum
short-circuit levels, full load, nominal load, low load, equipment short-circuit capabilities, system
configuration, dc offsets during faults, decay time of fault, automatic restoration schemes, large motors
connected, and generation connected.
Overcurrent protective devices, including circuit breakers, are typically connected on the distribution
system at the substation while fuses, sectionalizers, and reclosers are typically located along the distribution
lines and at the customer feeds. Many types of DR will have overcurrent protection as part of the DR
protection package. Voltage restrained overcurrent protection can be an alternative for detecting faults
remote to the DR. This can be the case for DR with changing short-circuit contribution because of multiple
generator sets, or DR with low short-circuit current such as inverter-based DR.
The objective of setting overcurrent protection is to determine settings that will clear the fault as quickly as
possible while limiting the portion of the circuit that is de-energized to affect as few end customers as
possible while avoiding false trips.
The use of time-current curves is the traditional methodology of determining the coordination among the
protective devices. All protected equipment has a time-current damage characteristic, and each protective
device has a time-current characteristic that will determine the time it takes to clear at a given current. By
coordinating the different overcurrent protective devices at different levels of anticipated short-circuit
currents, a well-designed overcurrent protection system can reliably protect lines and equipment in an
electrical distribution system while minimizing the extent of outages.
Each of the overcurrent devices needs to be applied and set such that faults at customer loads are cleared by
the customer protection or fuses on the Area EPS line feeding the customer. Normally, faults along the
Area EPS feeder should be cleared by the closest upstream device. However, DR also may provide fault
current in addition to that from the Area EPS and in some situations may cause the downstream protective
device between the fault and the DR to trip due to the DR fault contribution. So, both upstream and
downstream protective devices next to the fault may be tripped due to the presence of the DR. This can
cause confusion for the system operator and may delay the restoration effort. So, the potential DR fault
current needs to be taken into account when considering the protection impact of the DR on existing
overcurrent protection. It may be necessary to use directional overcurrent or distance elements to avoid
having a device trip for upstream faults. Directional fault indicators may also be helpful.
Excessive unbalance in phase currents can result in inadvertent operation of substation and distribution
circuit ground fault protective equipment. Directional fault sensing can be confused when the positive
sequence current flow is different than the negative and zero sequence current as could occur depending on
the transformer configuration of the DR.
Ground fault protection can be set to detect a lower level of fault current than that of phase protection since
normal operating ground current flow on four-wire circuits should be much lower than load current. On
three-wire circuits, there are no normal ground current flows and the ground relay can be set very sensitive.
For four-wire circuits, the feeder ground overcurrent protective device also needs to be set high enough to
66
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
avoid tripping on normal unbalanced load current flow through the device. Tripping of single-phase laterals
may provide the highest levels of unbalanced current flow through upstream devices.
Sensitive DR ground fault settings may quickly remove the DR from the circuit, and thereby return the
circuit to its pre-DR configuration. The protection coordination of the circuit without the presence of the
DR should also be considered.
An important outcome of the protective device coordination study is to determine the appropriate protective
device sensitivity. The sensitivity levels will need to be closely examined once the effects of the DR are
incorporated. Typically, the minimum fault current contribution from the Area EPS decreases with
increased DR, which reflects a loss of sensitivity. A properly applied protection scheme may allow a device
to sense the lowest level fault while not false-tripping under non-fault situations. The application and
setting of the protective devices are often a trade-off between setting to maximum sensitivity with a
probability of some false trips or maximum reliability which will avoid false trips but may result in some
faults not being cleared in a timely fashion.
Each type of fault has its own characteristics, and different types of DR technologies affect these
characteristics. Bolted three-phase faults have high levels of fault current, which is limited only by the
source impedances, and need to be cleared quickly to minimize the damage. Line-to-line and line-to-line-
to-ground faults will generally have lower energy but need to be cleared quickly since the amount of energy
is still substantial.
Line-to-ground faults are based on the positive, negative, and zero sequence impedance values. The DR
grounding configuration, as well as the DR interface transformer winding and grounding configurations,
will influence the ground fault detection sensitivity of existing ground fault relays. An interface transformer
may be a source of zero sequence current, which will serve to reduce Area EPS sensitivity to line-to-ground
faults. An interface transformer may also pass zero sequence current flow supplied by the DR, also
resulting in reduced Area EPS sensitivity to line-to-ground faults. Neutral grounding impedances of either
the DR or the DR interface transformer need to be considered to properly evaluate the impact on Area EPS
line-to-ground fault contributions.
The relative amount of fault current provided to a fault is also characterized by the DR technology
implemented. The fault levels contributed by synchronous generators can sometimes reach eight times to
10 times full load current for bolted three-phase faults. Induction generators can sometimes provide initial
fault levels up to six times full load current, but the fault level will typically decay within a few cycles.
Inverters typically provide fault levels slightly greater than their full load rating. Inverter fault levels can be
maintained or can decay quickly depending on the inverters controls and the energy source behind the
inverter.
Some electrical power systems are grounded with solid grounds at the neutral of a transformer, generator,
inverter, or other ground deriving device. In some cases, the ground is created through an impedance such
as a grounding resistor or grounding reactor. These impedances have the effect of limiting the ground
current. Some industrial systems utilize ungrounded delta connections with ground fault detection schemes.
Ground fault protective devices are typically set to detect the lowest level of ground fault current flow.
When multiple grounding sources are on a circuit, or when DR creates an additional grounding source, the
ground current flow at the point of grounding may, under some conditions, be lower than anticipated since
the multiple grounding sources will be in parallel with each other feeding the grounding impedance. These
devices, however, need to be set high enough in order to avoid a false trip due to ground current flows due
to normal operation such as that due to normal neutral current flow through the ground and third harmonic
current flow. Some protective devices are sensitive to third harmonic and other harmonic current flow
which may cause them to false trip if these harmonics are not taken into consideration.
Bolted faults are the easiest to detect; however, high impedance and arcing faults can be difficult to detect.
The contribution to faults from a DR can reduce the contribution through the Area EPS devices and may
aggravate the situation. Arcing faults may be intermittent and have high current for several cycles followed
67
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
by low or no current flow. Arcing faults can occur due to downed conductors or some types of cable
damage. If the system is a floating delta system, the arcing may create a transient overvoltage situation
where the voltage-to-ground may reach many times rated phase-to-ground voltage until flashover occurs.
Arcing faults are difficult to protect against. Ground fault protection provides some level of protection. But
in many cases, the fault is not cleared until enough damage is done for the arcing fault to clear itself,
escalate into a solid fault, or the Area EPS operator shuts down the circuit due to notice from a member of
the public. Some types of relays are designed to sense when a conductor is down and provide appropriate
protection.
DR often aggravates the issue of detecting arcing ground faults. Since an arcing ground fault and many
other ground faults are high impedance faults, the current contribution of the DR in some cases decreases
the current contribution from the substation. This means that the substation protective devices may need to
be more sensitive with DR connected than if no DR were connected.
The addition of a DR may increase the chances of the Area EPS not being able to detect certain faults. In
such cases, the Area EPS protection may need to be reconfigured to regain some of its sensitivity.
Alternatively, by setting the DR protection very sensitive with a long time delay to detect and eventually
trip for these faults, staggered tripping could be achieved when the DR disconnects and an increase in the
fault current is then detected by the Area EPS allowing the Area EPS to eventually clear the fault as well.
When setting the protection of the DR this low, it may pick up for adjacent feeder faults and, therefore, the
time delay should be set sufficient to allow the adjacent feeder to clear first.
8.3.3 Study ID C2.3Automatic restoration coordination
Most Area EPS operators use automatic restoration as part of their distribution system fault restoration
schemes. Faults on overhead circuits are often temporary in nature, therefore Area EPS operators have
found that reclosing often restores service without further action.
Historically, radial distribution systems have only one source upstream of the automatic restoration device,
and Area EPS automatic restoration devices are set up to automatically reclose after a preset time interval.
The reclosing time delay may vary between 15 cycles to 30 seconds depending on the Area EPS practice.
With the presence of a DR on the distribution feeder, there is a possibility that the feeder breaker recloser
may close in on the DR out of phase and cause severe damage to the DR and transient overvoltage on the
feeder. Hence, the feeder recloser operation needs to be checked so the breaker will not reclose while the
DR is still energized and tied with the feeder at the time of reclose.
An automatic restoration coordination study looks at the DR impact on the Area EPS sectionalizing and
automatic restoration scheme. Once the protective devices protect the system and separate the different
portions of the electrical system, the automatic restoration devices may start to put the electrical system
back together. Automatic restoration coordination becomes extra critical with distributed resources.
Reclosers typically use overcurrent protection to open the circuit and may automatically close back on the
circuit either instantaneously or with a set time delay. In IEEE Std 1547, it states the DR shall cease to
energize the Area EPS circuit to which it is connected prior to reclosure by the Area EPS. Because the
frequency and phase angle of the DR may differ from the EPS when the two are separated, the recloser
should not reclose unless the DR is disconnected from the EPS or is within the allowable voltage and phase
tolerance from the EPS on each phase. The disconnection may be by fault detection or by the DR anti-
islanding protection scheme.
68
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
All of the factors below need to be taken into account when performing an automatic restoration
coordination study, which should be done as a companion study to any short-circuit and protective
coordination studies. The issue of automatic restoration could be very serious or not very serious at all,
depending on these factors:
Area EPS reclosing times, if applicable. Some underground feeders do not have reclosing.
The nature of the DR generator (size and type).
Maximum and minimum kW and kVAr load levels on the line section beyond the automatic
restoration device(s) in question.
Possible reclose blocking capabilities of the automatic restoration device(s) in question.
Nature of the interconnection protection equipment and its ability to clear the DR generator offline
prior to upstream device reclosure.
Large motor loads on the line section up to the automatic restoration device.
Likelihood of the DR to stay on-line longer than the reclosing interval.
8.3.4 Study ID C2.4Area EPS power system grounding
Incompatible grounding systems may cause overvoltages and floating neutrals when the feeder breaker is
opened. The study should confirm the DR will not cause phase overvoltages if the feeder is disconnected
from the rest of the distribution system and the DR circuit is isolated from the ground reference. During
single-phase faults, unfaulted phases will experience overvoltages for the duration of the fault due to a shift
in the neutral point of the line-to-ground voltage vectors. The degree of overvoltage depends on the
effectiveness of the overall grounding system. If the DR interconnection is not equally effectively
grounded, the overvoltages on unfaulted phases can increase substantially when the DR is isolated with the
circuit during a line-to-ground fault.
A grounding study looks at the impacts of DR on the integrity of the Area EPS grounding scheme. The
study should consider the Area EPS configuration (i.e., delta, grounded-wye, etc.), DR interconnection
configuration and equipment, and existing and proposed ground fault protection equipment. At a minimum,
the study should evaluate temporary overvoltages on the unfaulted phases when the DR backfeeds a ground
fault on the Area EPS. It should also consider the DR contribution to ground fault currents, and the possible
miscoordination with overcurrent protection devices on the Area EPS. If the study recommends neutral
grounding impedance or grounding transformers, the voltage and thermal ratings of such equipment should
be specified [B11].
8.3.5 Study ID C2.5Synchronization
The DR needs to be running within its phase, frequency, and voltage tolerances with the grid at the moment
of the breaker closing to avoid voltage and current transients which may cause severe generator damage
and damage to adjacent customers equipment.
69
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
The synchronization study will check the relay and/or inverter control settings to assure that generation
cannot connect to the electric power system out of phase tolerance, out of voltage tolerance, or out of
frequency tolerance.
8.3.6 Study ID C2.6Unintentional islanding
The voltage and frequency on an unintentional island are not controlled by the Area EPS and may be well
outside the allowable limits.
An unintentional islanding study looks at the potential for single or aggregate DR and load to form islands
when connection to the Area EPS is interrupted. The study should analyze the potential to island under
varying expected Area EPS topologies and loading conditions and should include the effects of existing and
planned load shedding schemes and DR ride-through capabilities. The study should also consider DR
voltage, frequency, power, and reactive power control modes and capabilities.
8.3.7 Study ID C2.7Arc flash hazard study
Changes to the National Electrical Safety Code 8,9 have focused attention on the dangers of arc flash
hazards when persons are working near energized electrical equipment. These changes have prompted Area
EPS operators to initiate projects to calculate incident arc flash energy on circuits to determine potential
exposure. The addition of DR may increase the fault duty and the associated arc flash hazards; therefore, an
arc flash hazard evaluation may be needed as part of the overall interconnection review.
Arc flash hazard studies are an extension of the short-circuit analysis described earlier in this clause.
System and DR information required for short-circuit and protective device analyses are also required for
these studies.
Arc flash hazard studies determine the amount of incident energy available at the work location, the
minimum personal protective equipment (PPE), and the alterations to existing protection schemes and work
practices to meet the maximum fault energy limitations.
The arc flash hazard is proportional to the voltage, current, and duration of the arcing event. The incident
energy is calculated from the fault current, arc duration time, and the work distance and is expressed in
either cal/cm2 or Joules/cm2. The fault contribution is a summation of fault currents from all sources. Each
source of fault current has a clearing time associated with its protective equipment that determines the
8
National Electrical Safety Code and NESC are both registered trademarks and service marks of The Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, Inc.
9
The NESC is available from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA
(http://standards.ieee.org/).
70
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
duration of the arcing event. The calculated incident energy value is then used to determine the PPE to
provide adequate protection and to determine the arc flash boundary distances.
The addition of DR may increase the arc flash magnitudes. The magnitude will largely depend on
characteristics and settings of the protective devices clearing the fault. Possibly, multiple scenarios should
be analyzed for the worst case incident energy at each location. The arc flash calculations may reveal that
the present level of PPE is exceeded by the additional fault energy provided by the DR. If the incident
energy increases due to DR installation, a higher level of PPE may be used to reduce the impact of
increased arc flashover. However, individual Area EPS operator work practices may not permit the DR to
exceed present arc flash levels or may not allow an increase to the level of PPE that may cause restrictive
work methods. Too much PPE may cause heat stress, poor visibility, and restrict body movement. In these
cases, if changes to the protection schemes are not sufficient to mitigate the arc flash energy, and if the risk
is too great to allow safe working conditions, the DR may not be allowed to interconnect or may be
required to disconnect from the grid while work is performed on energized equipment. In some cases, fault
current limiters may be a potential solution.
Arc flash hazard studies calculate the highest energy level at the work location. The worst case arc flash
energy values are usually near the substation. This is due to the high source fault current and the long
clearing time of the breakers. However, the energy feeding the arc is a function of fault current and
duration, so the slower clearing faults at locations remote from the substation can deliver more energy even
with a lower current. Also, as DR penetration increases, calculations should be done at various locations on
the circuit to determine the worst case scenario. It is recommended that sub-transient impedances of the
synchronous DRs be used in arc flash calculations. Fault contributions from induction and inverter-based
generation should be included in the calculations given that both contribute fault current to the location.
8.4 Study ID C3Operational characteristicsloading, load shedding, etc.
8.4.1 Technical basis for the studies
Unless an adequate capacity allowance is maintained on the circuit that supplies DR, circuit capacity limits
may be exceeded if the DR is not operated under high load conditions. Calculation of the capacity
allowance for DR on the circuit may need to be based on an estimate of the power injected by DR without
interval monitoring. Underfrequency load shedding relaying should be coordinated such that on dropping
frequency, load is shed before generation is shed; on overfrequency, generation is shed first. The
coordination would be to not compound a bad situation (i.e., falling frequency) by shedding generation
before, or at the same time as, load. There may be a need to alter the location or operation of existing load
shed schemes so that feeders with large DR or high penetration of DR are not connected to the load
shedding schemes.
8.4.2 Study methodology
The operational procedures and policies for the Area EPS should be reviewed with the introduction of DR
and as additional DR is installed. Where the overall penetration of DR is low compared to the load on the
Area EPS, loss of generation would not be expected to cause adverse effects to the circuit loading. As the
effects of the increased penetration of DR in the Area EPS become more pronounced, special studies
should be considered to analyze the impacts of normal and dynamic operation.
The operational procedures and policies may need to be reviewed for the impact of variation in DR output
that is typical of some types of DR. Equipment may need to be reset or replaced if the control algorithms
are not capable of reacting properly to the DR impacts. Equipment inspection policies may need to be
reviewed since some types of DR may cause increased operation of the voltage regulating devices.
71
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
When circuits in the Area EPS are subjected to load shedding, the DR anti-islanding protection would be
expected to operate correctly, as in any other islanding event. Load shedding schemes may need to be
revised to account for the circuit generation available to support the system. Schemes that use static peak
load values for circuits may not provide the expected load reductions if the DR is not properly included in
the database. If there is a high penetration of DR in the Area EPS, anti-islanding protection may cause
excessive sensitivity to voltage dips or frequency fluctuations. Special studies should be considered to
analyze the impacts of a large scale separation of DR from the Area EPS, which could possibly cause a
system stability problem.
Areas with large penetrations of solar and wind DR are subject to generation production changes due to the
changing magnitude of the solar or wind resource. These production changes can be large, and special
studies should be considered to analyze the impacts of large scale reductions and increases.
In cases when automatic restoration can transfer a DR to another feeder, the impact study needs also to be
done on that feeder. If the study determines that the DR cannot be transferred, the automatic restoration
scheme needs to be modified accordingly. Furthermore, if automatic restoration devices can transfer load
from neighboring feeders to the DR feeder, the impact study also needs to consider these loads. This is
especially important for the criteria of minimum fault coverage in the protection study.
9. Special system impact studies
9.1 Introduction
There is no definite division line between conventional and special system impact studies. Different EPS
may have different guidelines on this matter. In most cases, special studies will not be necessary. However,
a need could arise to perform special studies even after the DR has been interconnected. For example,
technical issues experienced after the DR interconnection, customer complaints, or a new DR application
on the feeder might trigger some of these special studies.
Table 4 shows the different special system impact studies and their relationship to potential system impacts
on the Area EPS, along with a study ID for reference and a clause number reference.
72
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Table 4 Type of study vs potential impact on the EPS

Impact Study Clause Un- Area EPS Protection Voltage Power
ID intentional equipment design, regulation and quality
islanding duty and coordination reactive
operating and fault power
Study type ratings rating management
Quasi-static S1 9.4 X X X X
simulation
Dynamic simulation S2 9.5 X X X
Dynamic stability S2.1 9.5.1 X X X
System stability S2.2 9.5.2 X X X
Stability analysis S2.3 9.5.3 X X X
interpretation
Voltage and S2.4 9.5.4 X X X
frequency ride-
through
Electromagnetic S3 9.6 X X
transient simulation
Ferroresonance S3.1 9.6.1 X
Interaction of S3.2 9.6.2 X X X X X
different types of
DR
Temporary S3.3 9.6.3 X X X X
overvoltage
System grounding S3.4 9.6.3 X X X
DC injection S3.5 9.6.4 X
Harmonics and S4 9.7 X X
flicker
Harmonic analysis S4.1 9.7.1 X X
Harmonic problems S4.2 9.7.2 X X
Harmonic resonance S4.3 9.7.3 X X
Flicker S4.4 9.7.4 X
9.2 Technical basis for the studies
9.2.1 Under special conditions
Special studies may need to be conducted for the following conditions: when conventional impact studies
performed yield marginal results, when impacts may be anticipated under conditions that are not
conventionally studied, or where special conditions have been observed in the Area EPS near the DR
location that may cause improper operating conditions. These impacts could be power quality problems,
such as harmonic resonance; voltage flicker or temporary overvoltage; control operation, such as
interaction of multiple DR or interaction between DR and Area EPS equipment; or excessive operations of
mechanical equipment.
9.2.2 Load levels
Special studies may need to be conducted when an adverse impact is anticipated for the DR under various
load levels or conditions on the Area EPS. Traditional Area EPS studies of the Area EPS have tended to
focus on peak load conditions because radial distribution overloads and voltage deficiencies generally
occur under these conditions rather than under off-peak conditions. Some Area EPS have also required
study at minimum load to determine if overvoltages occur. The injection of power into the Area EPS by DR
may cause overvoltages to the Area EPS under reduced load conditions where the injected real and/or
reactive power flow exceeds the Area EPS power flow at some point on the circuit. Since some types of
73
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
DR will not operate under certain conditions, such as PV after dark, identifying the actual load conditions
that could lead to overvoltages on the Area EPS may require a large number of conventional power flow
studies, which may become impractical. In these cases, a quasi-static simulation tool may be used to
identify load and injected power levels that cause problems on the Area EPS.
Many Area EPS operators have not modeled distribution secondary transformers and secondary cable in
their conventional model. The size of the transformer and the cables to the customer meter are typically
sized for the anticipated Local EPS load and the distance from the transformer to the PCC. When reverse
power flow occurs in this section of the Area EPS, special studies may be considered to confirm that the
voltage remains in the proper range under all load levels. Where several Local EPSs share the transformer
and/or the secondary main, overvoltage conditions may exist for both the DR owner as well as nearby
customers. A quasi-static simulation tool may identify adverse conditions caused by DR at the service
voltage level if the transformer and secondary can be properly modeled.
9.2.3 Multiple DR or control algorithms
Special studies may need to be conducted when an adverse impact is anticipated between multiple DR or
between DR and Area EPS control algorithms on the Area EPS. When adverse impacts are anticipated
between the DR and locally controlled equipment in the Area EPS or between operations of multiple DR on
the Area EPS, a special study may be prepared to analyze the interactions. For these studies, typical
conditions, such as cloud shear for PV, may be studied over a minute-to-minute basis to model the
interaction between the control algorithms of the various DR and Area EPS equipment. These devices can
include voltage regulators, field capacitor banks, transformer load tap changers, and bus capacitors. Area
EPS operators use a wide variety of control techniques for their field equipment, including several types of
local control and various centralized control algorithms using telecommunication devices to convey system
information and control responses. Control algorithms for DR, including techniques for mitigating voltage
fluctuations that may be caused by variable power output, may need to be adjusted for specific conditions
in the Area EPS. Multiple DR connected near each other in the Area EPS may lead to adverse impacts
because of their control interactions.
Where Area EPS operators make use of automated transfer schemes to reconfigure the Area EPS, special
studies may be used to analyze the interaction between these schemes and the DR affected by the transfers.
These schemes are often initiated by a fault and are used to isolate the faulted segment of the circuit so that
the rest of the circuit can be restored. The control algorithm may initiate a transfer assuming DR within the
scheme is operating when it would have disconnected from the Area EPS because of the fault. This could
lead to an overloaded circuit until the DR reestablishes connection with the Area EPS. When DR located
within the scheme is significantly large, the Area EPS operator may enhance the control algorithm to
account for the temporary loss of the DR. The DR output may be telemetered to the Area EPS operator, or
an assumed output could be calculated for the DR where the actual output is unavailable.
9.2.4 DR operations
Special studies may need to be conducted when the DR operations may impact EPS resilience to bulk EPS
emergencies. Large DR or large aggregations of DR may change the outcome of EPS angle, voltage, and
frequency instability situations. The behavior of the DR in response to swings in voltage, frequency, and
angle in the EPS depends on the setup of DR protection and controls. These parameters can be optimized
based on the analyses of the EPS emergency situations with integration of the interconnected DR. For
example, if in an under-frequency situation some generation is lost due to disconnection of DR, the
frequency may further drop, which may lead to a significantly more severe development of the
contingency. Studies of such situations may assist in determining the recommended setups of the DR
protection and control to provide secure ride-through behavior of DR.
74
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
9.3 Study methodologies
Considering the potential issues that can be studied under a special study category, four study types and
tools are presented below:
S1: Quasi-static simulation

S2: Dynamic studies
S3: Electromagnetic transient simulation
S4: Harmonics and flicker studies
Before discussing these four methodologies, general background on models is given.
9.3.1 Adequacy of Area EPS and DR models
For the production of high fidelity and faithful results from any system study involving DR, use of accurate
models of DR and Area EPS is of paramount importance and can be considered as the foundation of the
study. Use of an accurate model for both DR and the Area EPS is quite challenging, especially in a
situation when validated models are not available for fast and continuously evolving DR technologies.
Moreover, different models are used to perform different kinds of studies, and each of these studies focuses
on different issues of interest which use a particular type of model to represent the Area EPS and the DR.
At present, models of some DR technologies are available in the literature to a limited scale. Many of these
models are not validated and hence, remain questionable. In addition, many models of DR are not the
models of individual units but rather an aggregated version. These aggregated models do not show the
interaction between different DR units. The models also suffer from some inaccuracy, especially in the case
of large PV or wind plants, because solar irradiance and wind velocity vary over geographic dispersions of
the plants. However, for studying the impact of large DR technologies, the use of aggregated models is
unavoidable in some cases. In such cases, accuracy of aggregated models could be improved through
further research. In the course of time, the situation is expected to improve. Adequate and validated models
would be developed to perform these studies.
Among various studies used for understanding the impact of DR, power flow study is the simplest, and the
information needed to model DR installation and Area EPS in a power flow study is mostly contained in
the basic equipment rating. However, dynamic and transient study models are not easily available for each
type of DR technology. For example, dynamic stability models (generic) for synchronous machine-based
generators of various types of DR installations are typically available in the libraries provided with leading
power-system-analysis programs. These usually include a selection of dynamic models for synchronous
machine generators, which can be combined with a variety of models for exciters and prime mover
systems. Using these models, there is usually no difficulty representing this traditional type of DR in a
dynamic stability study. However, models for proprietary equipment, especially related to the exciter or
governor system, may not be available. In that case, a generic model would be a good approximation to go
ahead with the impact study. Similarly, for dynamic stability models for inverter-based DR, there is a
rapidly growing class of DR that is electronically coupled to the ac bus by means of various types of power
frequency converters or inverters. At present, this class of DR includes practically every type of generation
based on renewable or alternative energy sources where the electricity produced at the source is either dc or
variable frequency ac. Generic dynamic stability models representing the behavior of certain types of
inverter-based DR are usually included in analysis program libraries. However, accurate models of specific
commercial inverter-based DR equipment are often viewed as proprietary property and are not yet as freely
available as those for synchronous machine-based generators. This may be expected to change as dynamic
stability studies involving new DR installations become more common.
The detailed behavior characteristics of inverter-based DR are determined by the design of their respective
control systems; but, in general, the ac output control can be dramatically faster than in the case of a
75
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
synchronous machine-based generator. They have the capability to control output current, power, or
voltage virtually instantaneously as they are not subject to the field-exciter response time and slow
rotational dynamics of machine-based generators. For purposes of dynamic stability analysis, the dynamic
response of inverter-based DR is usually so fast that it can be assumed to be instantaneous, and the
equipment can be modeled as an ideal, current-limited, variable-power source. The value of the associated
output power at each time step may be obtained from a separate model of the power source. For example,
in the case of a solar PV power source, the modeled DR power level may be derived directly from a time-
varying irradiance input.
Although the dynamic response time may be neglected in formulating the dynamic stability model of an
inverter-based DR installation, it is important that the built-in protective features and various modes of
operation of the DR installation should be properly represented. Depending on the operating modes
selected, the equipment may allow externally supplied commands to change the power factor, maximum
power, reactive power, or other operational parameters. Similarly, the model should allow the appropriate
mode selection inputs and should provide operational parameter inputs that can be changed from one time
step to the next. Typical protective features that should be modeled include the limiting of output current
and automatic disconnection from the power system when the local bus voltage is outside specified
tolerance limits, or when a remote trip input (originating from protective relaying) is active.
Dynamic stability analysis was rarely applied to the analysis of distribution systems in the past, possibly
due to the fact that most synchronous machine generators connected to distribution feeders are typically too
small to cause power oscillation or instability in the grid. However, the prospect of increasing DR
penetration into the grid with considerable aggregate rating has made dynamic stability studies more
relevant for distribution systems, and they are now being mandated, in some cases, for large DR
installations. For example, large solar plants could lose their generation within a few seconds due to the
cloud cover. This might have significant impact on the system stability, which can be understood only
through a dynamic analysis. Therefore, these studies are helpful for verifying the behavior of the system
and its protective relaying during specified contingency conditions.
For transient study, generic transient models (e.g., differential equations) for the various types of DR (e.g.,
synchronous machine, inverter-based) can be defined, assuming textbook power circuits and controls with
parameters selected to provide reasonable performance. The model equations for the generic system can
then be solved in transient system studies to calculate typical waveforms for voltage, current, etc., under
specified conditions. Unfortunately, accurate transient models for specific commercial DR equipment often
contain sensitive proprietary design information and are not freely available. This is particularly true in the
case of inverter-based DR where the transient performance is entirely determined by the design and
implementation of the inverter control system. Generic transient models may be useful for research, but
they may not be particularly meaningful for use in impact studies. Consequently, transient studies often
benefit from the participation of the equipment manufacturer. An equipment manufacturer may be willing
to provide executable encoded transient models of their equipment for use in broader system studies
without having to reveal the source of the model code. Once verified, such models can be used in transient
studies in much the same way as the actual equipment is used in a real system without revealing proprietary
design information.
Modeling the Area EPS for all types of studies is less challenging as compared to the modeling of the DR.
The Area EPS, which consists of only conventional technology, can be modeled using the existing models
from the program library. The Area EPS operator also owns the Area EPS data, which enables model
development. However, an Area EPS with newer DR technologies and other advanced system
reconfiguration capability might need to address similar challenges discussed above. Network
reconfiguration, distribution automation, and smart grid features might bring newer challenges in the future
for modeling Area EPS.
The interaction of DR with the Area EPS can become more challenging when the Area EPS is in an
abnormal condition, which can be caused by substation outages, storm damage, or high level transmission
contingencies. Analysis of abnormal conditions is difficult since the nature of the precipitating event can be
highly varied. Typically, the addition of generation in periods of stress on the Area EPS is positive;
76
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
however, the uncertainty of the DR reaction to the stress on the Area EPS may lead to a wide range of
possible outcomes.
DR connected to the Area EPS where the Area EPS operator has implemented distribution automation
schemes to enhance system reliability should be studied in alternative system configurations for proper
operation. Similarly, other emergency conditions should be modeled assuming the DR is anticipated to
continue operation. For example, in distribution automation schemes that use section loads prior to an
outage to develop a switching plan, loss of DR precipitated by the outage may lead to significantly larger
section loads than would have been expected based on the loads prior to the outage. Large DR may be
monitored and specifically added back in the switching plan. Large numbers of small DR, however, may be
estimated from the known total maximum output of the individual units. The maximum output of the small
DR may reduce before adding back to the switching plan in accordance with the expected output based on
the weather in the area.
9.4 Study ID S1Quasi-static simulation
Quasi-static simulation refers to a sequence of steady-state power flow conducted at a time step of no less
than 1 second but that can use a time step of up to one hour. Discrete controls, such as capacitor switch
controllers, transformer tap changers, automatic switches, and relays may change their state from one step
to the next. However, there is no numerical integration of differential equations between time steps. A
simple quasi-static simulator can be implemented with existing power flow or short-circuit programs under
supervisory control. Open-source quasi-static simulators are also available.
One application is to perform energy and loss evaluations over actual profiles of load and generation. Some
commercial programs perform this function by simulating the power flow over load duration curves. These
studies are useful in determining the economic value of DR.
For variable power sources, such as wind and solar, a quasi-static simulation can reveal voltage fluctuation
impacts or changes in Area EPS voltage due to variable DR output that occur before discrete voltage
controls can respond. A quasi-static simulation can also show the impact on voltage controls, such as
capacitor switches and tap changers. It can also simulate impacts on overcurrent protection. Quasi-static
simulation can also address integrated volt/var control and other automation schemes. These modeling
features are often only available in programs tailored to distribution systems.
The power flow tool should be capable of simulating the behavior of controllable devices in accordance
with the control settings and constraints, such as band centers, time delays, bandwidths, line drop
compensation, overrides, number of operations, etc. Quasi-static simulations can show the impact of the
voltage fluctuations on system equipment and customers. Separate flicker studies, described below, analyze
the effects of voltage fluctuations on customer lighting systems located near the DR.
9.5 Study ID S2Dynamic simulation
Dynamic simulation refers to analysis intended to model the Area EPS voltage magnitude and frequency
response to major events, such as the loss of large generators, the loss of heavily loaded transmission
circuits, and faults that are not cleared from the Area EPS for a significant period of time. These
simulations would predict, based on protective settings of the relays and breakers in the Area EPS,
cascading outages that might follow a major event. The response of the Area EPS to a major event may
show the same characteristics at the PCC of DR as a local disturbance that would initiate a trip of anti-
islanding protection. Where DR serves a significant percentage of load in Area EPS, a transmission level
event that caused a high percentage of DR to disconnect could seriously exacerbate the stability of the
system. These effects have been experienced in small Area EPSs, generally on physical islands that are not
connected to the mainland Area EPS. The effects that are anticipated include local voltage magnitude dips
77
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
and surges, frequency excursions, and current surges that result from changes in system configuration
during a serious transmission level event. Under certain circumstances, an event on a distribution circuit
could cause a loss of DR on neighboring circuits that would lead to reduced voltages at the distribution
substation level.
Dynamic simulation models use an initial system load pattern developed in a standard power flow model;
however, where the frequency is assumed to remain unchanged in a power flow, the dynamic
characteristics of the system are modeled so that frequency changes caused by faults, separation of heavily
loaded paths, and loss of large generators can be evaluated. Differential equations are used to model the
changes in generator output from one time step to the next due to rotational dynamics and the action of
field exciters and engine governors. Appropriate time steps are used (e.g., 5 ms to 20 ms), and the steady
state power flow solution at each time step is based on balanced impedance calculations at the nominal
power system frequency. Dynamic models of electromechanical generators are mature and mirror actual
performance of the generators under actual conditions. Models of inverter and generator combinations may
not have reached that level of maturity.
9.5.1 Study ID S2.1Dynamic stability
A dynamic stability study looks at the DR impact on the ability of the Area EPS to return to a suitable
operating point after a dynamic response to a disturbance. The study should consider the Area EPS
configuration, DR interconnection configuration and equipment, and Area EPS protection and coordination
schemes, DR characteristics, and expected DR generation levels as well as DR voltage, power, and reactive
power control capabilities. The study should also reflect the impact of DR under varying expected
topologies and loading conditions.
Dynamic stability studies are appropriate for capturing certain kinds of time-varying conditions in a power
system. These variations may be due to the (relatively slow) dynamic characteristics of synchronous
machine generators, the operation of protection systems, or other conditional changes in circuit elements or
loads as a function of changing power flow, bus voltage, or time.
Dynamic stability analysis is commonly used to study power oscillation in transmission systems but is
rarely applied to the analysis of distribution systems that are part of a major grid. This is possibly due to the
fact that most synchronous machine generators connected to distribution feeders are typically too small to
cause power oscillation or instability in the grid. However, the prospect of increasing DR penetration into
the grid, with considerable aggregate rating, has made dynamic stability studies more relevant for
distribution systems, and they are now being mandated, in some cases, for large DR installations. These
studies are helpful for verifying the behavior of the system and its protective relaying during specified
contingency conditions.
Many of the existing electrical distribution systems have quickly changing loads and generation. Quickly
changing loads are characteristic of customers usage of electricity. Quickly changing generation is often
due to quickly changing intermittent energy sources, such as wind and solar. Dynamic analysis takes the
power flow study one step further by analyzing the effects these quickly changing parts of the electrical
distribution system have on each other and the system operations. In particular, quickly changing load and
generation can create large voltage swings and changes in power flows that may threaten the integrity of
the integrated power distribution system. This may result in excessive operation of some equipment (e.g.,
tap changers, voltage regulators, capacitor banks, etc.) or may, in the extreme, result in loss of
synchronization between different parts of the system.
9.5.2 Study ID S2.2System stability
DR integration might lead to some stability-related issues, especially if a large DR is connected to a weak
system in a high-penetration scenario. Area EPS system planners will need to determine the test cases used
78
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
for analysis of the dynamic model without the DR (benchmark case) and with the DR (test case). The
benchmark case is used to determine the response of the system to steady state conditions and to
disturbances to verify that the system is able to meet the criteria set by the system planner prior to the
addition of the DR as well as verify that there are no errors in the benchmark model.
A simulation of the benchmark case without disturbances, if initialized properly, should show no transient
or dynamic oscillations. If oscillations are found, a model error in the dynamic data may be out of limits or
may not have initialized properly, and the system planner will need to fix the problem prior to any stability
analysis of the DR installation.
A simulation of the benchmark case with disturbances should show damping of oscillations and should
meet all stability criteria developed by the system planner prior to any stability analysis of the DR
installation.
Once a valid benchmark model is obtained for the system, the DR installation may be added to the model
and stability analysis performed. Similar to the benchmark case, the DR test case should not develop any
system oscillations prior to a disturbance on the system. If oscillations occur, the system planner will need
to verify that they have a valid stability model for the DR installation and that initialization of the model is
acceptable.
Once a valid DR test model is developed, the system planner will need to investigate transient and/or
dynamic responses of the DR to disturbances on the system. The system planner will need to develop the
types and duration of specific disturbances. A list of typical disturbances that may be investigated during
stability analysis is as follows:
Motor starting
Capacitor switching
Voltage regulator and/or transformer LTC action
Under-frequency load shedding
Fault responses
Fault and reclose
Fault and clear
Fault and intentional island of DR
9.5.3 Study ID S2.3Stability analysis interpretation
After results of the stability analysis are obtained, they will need to be interpreted. Interpretation of the
results will include analysis by the system planner to verify that the DR installation meets the stability
criteria. If the DR installation does not meet the criteria, the system planner may need to develop solutions
that will provide a means for the DR installation to meet the criteria.
System mitigation options for stability concerns may include facility additions, modification of protective
equipment, recalibration of capacitor/regulator/LTC controls, or other modifications to the system
including remedial action schemes or special protection systems. The system planner may need to
determine critical clearing times to clear faults or isolate devices, provide location and size for
capacitors/regulators, or provide distribution system modifications.
Options at the DR installation may include changing the DR inertia, adjusting exciter or governor controls,
adding voltage compensating devices, or instituting special protective systems including isolation of the
DR during fault conditions.
79
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
9.5.4 Study ID S2.4Voltage and frequency ride-through
As DR reaches higher penetration levels, disturbances may lead to a significant number of DR units
tripping, with an impact on bulk system reliability. NERCs Task Force on Integrating Variable Generation
found that DR at high penetration levels will significantly impact the bulk power system, and high
penetration levels need to be included in the planning process [B17]. In particular, this NERC Task Force
recommended response to abnormal grid conditions in IEEE Std 1547 to be reconciled with bulk power
system ride-through requirements. There have been additional requests for ride-through capabilities from
other organizations.
FERC Order 661-A specifies a 9-cycle, zero-voltage ride-through capability for any possible post-fault
recovery voltage. The NERC and WECC proposals add some constraints on the recovery voltage.
Some grid frequency ride-through requirements used or proposed for the U.S. distribution grid versus
transmission grid are different from each other. In IEEE Std 1547, for DR over 30 kW in size, the default
set points shall be field adjustable with the DR set point trip value at 0.16 seconds when the frequency
exceeds 60.5 Hz. This is different than the WECC and NERC requirements. The other default set point
values in IEEE Std 1547 are also different than the WECC and NERC set points.
In IEEE Std 1547, for DR equal to or less than 30 kW in size, the default set points and clearing times
shall be either fixed or field adjustable. For DR equal to or less than 30 kW in size, the IEEE Std 1547
default clearing times are different than the WECC and NERC requirements. For a large number of small
DR units interconnected on the Area EPS, if they all have the same fixed clearing time, then a relatively
large amount of generation could be cleared at the same time in response to a certain abnormal condition.
This could result in a destabilizing condition.
Some system operators allow broader ride-through requirements than IEEE Std 1547. Distribution ride-
through capability would be even more important to those operators.
Ride-through analyses need a dynamic or transient program for these studies. Appropriate models are
needed. Alternative islanding detection methods could be employed. The Area EPS operator might redesign
the feeder to accommodate islanding and ride-through or may encourage the DR owner to provide ride-
through capability. These are all possible focus points of a ride-through study.
9.6 Study ID S3Electromagnetic transient simulation
Electromagnetic transient (EMT) simulation addresses time-varying phenomena up to a frequency range

that is practically limited only by the simulation time-step. This type of simulation addresses unbalanced
conditions and solves for instantaneous voltage, current, etc. This type of simulation is done with
electromagnetic transients programs (EMTPs). EMTPs use the detailed differential equations describing the
circuits and the equipment, including any associated controls. These circuit equations are solved by
numerical integration, using relatively short time steps (e.g., 1 s-50 s), with the assistance of circuit-
analysis and simulation programs.
An EMT simulation is appropriate when the objective is to investigate instantaneous system behavior in
detail. In addition to the steady-state system response in the time-domain, a transient analysis study might
also determine the transient voltage and current waveforms that occur during a variety of fault conditions,
or following circuit switching related to breaker operation, capacitor switching, or load rejection, etc. For
example, the objective could be to ascertain the transient overvoltage that will not reach the threshold for
surge arresters to conduct, or the transient current that will not exceed breaker interrupt capability, or
adversely affect the operation of protective relays.
A transient analysis of DR might be done to verify control and protection systems of the DR or to verify
DR impacts on EPS control and protection systems. Transient simulation may be considered for the
80
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
analysis of temporary overvoltages and ferroresonance. Practically all of these studies need a detailed and
proprietary DR model, which means the DR vendor may be responsible for supplying the DR-related data.
A partial exception might be a ferroresonance study that is dominated by the interconnection transformer
model instead of the DR model. The transient analysis can be exempted by evaluating the design studies,
statements of assurance, or hardware test results by the vendor.
In practice, the use of transient analysis is often restricted by the lack of accurate detailed transient models,
inadequate data for transient models, and by the large amount of computing power needed to solve larger
networks. However, transient analysis is an excellent methodology for determining the effect proposed DR
might have on power quality. Transient analysis is the best tool for a system where the distribution system
is complicated and/or DR operation results in very quickly changing currents and voltages. The results of
the transient analysis can result in a full determination of levels of harmonics, voltages, and currents that
may result from the proposed DR. This information should be used to determine the appropriateness of
existing electrical distribution system equipment and the need for changes in equipment.
The following issues and concerns can be investigated using an EMT type study when an open-conductor
condition may occur.
Open-phase (single-phasing) conditions may occur on the Area EPS due to blown fuses, damaged
conductors, connector failure, bad splices, etc.
Backfeed from the generator can produce excessive overvoltages on the open phase, depending on
where the open occurs.
An open-conductor study looks at the potential for the DR to produce overvoltages or unstable load
voltages on the isolated section.
The study should consider the Area EPS configuration, DR interconnection configuration and equipment,
and Area EPS protection and coordination schemes. The study should also reflect the impact of DR under
varying expected topologies and loading conditions.
The determination of an open-phase fault impact on the electrical distribution system is a specialized study
using a time-domain and/or dynamics type analysis.
9.6.1 Study ID S3.1Ferroresonance
A ferroresonance study looks at the potential for the DR to excite or facilitate the excitation of oscillations
between a capacitance and a non-linear inductance such as a saturable iron core transformer. The study
should consider the Area EPS configuration, DR interconnection configuration and equipment, and Area
EPS protection and coordination schemes. The study should also reflect the impact of DR under varying
expected topologies and loading conditions.
The determination of ferroresonance in an electrical distribution system is a specialized study that analyzes
the details of equipment implementation. Ferroresonance studies should be considered wherever the
electrical system is ungrounded or where it is effectively ungrounded due to high ground impedances.
9.6.2 Study ID S3.2Interaction of different types of DR
When different types of DR are interconnected to the distribution system, the voltage profile of the system
might have some impact due to the operation of neighboring DR. A temporary overvoltage situation in a
DR can even trip/disconnect the nearby DR which is located in the close vicinity. In addition, the protection
coordination and relay settings might need some readjustments as it was observed that the presence of
neighboring DR in some cases reduces the critical fault clearing time of another DR plant [B18]. It has
been found that stability of a wind farm is reduced when generating at a higher output level. However, if
another wind farm is added in the feeder and they both operate simultaneously, critical fault clearing times
81
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
of both wind farms are reduced further. Therefore, the addition of distributed generation complicates
protection schemes and associated control equipment to such extent that if not properly handled, lower
reliability and even a reduction in power quality can result [B14]. In addition, there might exist a resonance
condition due to the presence of distributed shunt capacitance, series reactance, transformer winding
capacitance, inverter EMI filter capacitance, and capacitance-to-ground between the neighboring DR.
Transient simulation through proper modeling of all the DR and Area EPS in the close vicinity can
accurately reflect all these interactions due to the fault or any abnormal operation of the neighboring DR.
9.6.3 Study ID S3.3Temporary overvoltage
Temporary overvoltages (TOVs) are generally defined as ac overvoltage with a significant duration and
amplitude that appear in a system following a switching or fault condition, either resulting from normal
system operation or from fault conditions. The most common causes of TOV in a DR connected line could
be the faults and their clearing (including reclosing), sudden load rejection, transformer energizing,
capacitor switching, momentary reverse power flow, etc. Other special conditions such as ferroresonance,
uneven breaker pole operation, and faulty grounding can also cause overvoltage. The duration of the TOVs
are in the range of a few cycles to seconds, and the magnitude generally falls in the range of 1.0 p.u. to 1.6
p.u. (but sometimes 2.0 p.u. is used), which depends on system configurations, protection methods, and
operating equipment characteristics.
TOV is an abnormal event that is extremely difficult to prevent. However, in the planning and design
process it can be studied using transient simulation programs. Possible scenarios could be simulated to
estimate the impact of TOV in the ac line caused by various malfunction situations of DR as stated above.
Possible TOV mitigation techniques include the following:
Use an interconnection transformer winding configuration that provides a ground source. However,
this can upset ground fault coordination of protective devices and increase the neutral unbalance
currents.
Have the protection system disconnect DR before the Area EPS clears a fault.
In the case of ferroresonance-producing TOV, three-pole switching and certain transformer types
have been less susceptible.
Normally, surge arresters in the Area EPS are the first to fail during high TOV events. However, the TOV
limits should not be increased by upsizing surge arresters in the Area EPS because that may leave customer
equipment vulnerable to the un-mitigated TOV.
Customer equipment may be more vulnerable to TOV than Area EPS surge arresters. For example, the
ITIC (CBEMA-2000) curve 10 indicates that equipment damage may occur when the voltage is above
120% for times ranging from 3 ms to 500 ms, and when the voltage is above 110% for longer periods. An
Area EPS that is effectively grounded can meet TOV limits, but ground faults cannot be allowed for any
length of time if the Area EPS becomes ungrounded. This means ungrounded DR should trip before the
Area EPS device on such systems.
9.6.4 Study ID S3.4System grounding
The system grounding study is a more in-depth analysis than C2.4. The system grounding study may be
needed when the DR interface and control systems produce significant ground fault currents and associated
10
The ITI (CBEMA) Curve, included within this Application Note, is published by Technical Committee 3 (TC3) of the Information
Technology Industry Council (ITI, formerly known as the Computer & Business Equipment Manufacturers Association). It is
available at http://.www.itic.org/technical/iticurv.pdf.
82
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
voltages under certain open circuit or short-circuit fault scenarios. An EMT simulation is an example
method for analysis of this type of system grounding study.
9.6.5 Study ID S3.5DC injection
Inverters connected directly, without isolation transformers, to the Area EPS are the main concerns for dc
injection to the Area EPS. DC current injections can cause saturation in the transformers and other
magnetic elements and can also cause torque ripple in adjacent machine loads [B3]. There is also a
potential threat of continuous dc voltage being applied to the grid under internal DR power converter faults.
The control and protection of the system has to be designed to cease to energize the inverter from the grid
in such conditions. DC current injection limits should be preset and the control should typically cease to
energize DR distributed generation from the grid if the limit is exceeded. The dc injection study should be
performed to assure that the level of dc injection is below the allowable maximum limits. A transient
analysis of the network around PCC can detect the presence of dc currents through the Fourier analysis of
instantaneous currents and voltages.
9.7 Study ID S4Harmonics and flicker
A harmonic study looks at the potential for the DR to supply or contribute to distortion in the Area EPS
electrical power wave form. The study should consider the Area EPS configuration, DR interconnection
configuration and equipment, and DR characteristics. The study should also reflect the impact of DR under
varying expected topologies and loading conditions.
9.7.1 Study ID S4.1Harmonic analysis
Harmonic analysis should be considered if a DR installation is a possible source of significant harmonic (or
other non-fundamental frequency) currents. Additionally, pre-existing voltage harmonics at the point of
connection could adversely affect the operation of the DR installation. In either case, corrective action
could include the installation of power circuit filters.
Generating equipment used in DR installations is often pre-certified by various authorities as conforming to

standard harmonic specifications. In such cases, harmonic studies treating the equipment as a harmonic
source may be unnecessary.
If the existing electrical distribution system has harmonic-related power quality issues and/or the proposed
equipment is a source of harmonics, a harmonic analysis needs to be considered. Harmonic-related power
quality issues may be the effect of ambient power system voltage harmonics on the DR equipment and the
effect of residual current harmonics from the DR on the power system. Harmonic analysis takes into
account any possible resonance problems that may occur through interaction of the DR equipment and the
power system.
In some cases, the data for a harmonic study needs to include field measurements so that an accurate model
of the existing system can be made. Several study methodologies can be used to determine harmonic levels.
These include frequency domain studies, simulation of harmonic flows, transient analysis, and resonance
studies. The data that is required for these studies varies depending on the type of study. The level of data
available often determines the type of study that can be performed. The level of data available and the type
of study will often determine the level of detail in the results.
The result of the harmonic studies is to determine if a potential power quality threatening level of
harmonics may exist. There are several methods for mitigating harmonics. These methods may include
filtering, changes in the electrical distribution system (e.g., changing circuits, changing capacitor banks),
and/or changes in customer equipment. Changes in customer equipment may include that of proposed and
83
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
existing DR as well as existing nonlinear load equipment. The following issues and concerns can be
investigated using harmonic analysis.
9.7.2 Study ID S4.2Harmonic problems
Any DR technology may inject harmonic currents into the EPS within limits established in IEEE Std
519. In IEEE Std 519-1992, these limits appear in row one of Table 9-3 for any size DR connected at
medium voltage. The developer should provide harmonic injection data within these limits. The first step in
evaluation of harmonic problems is to conduct a frequency scan from the point of interconnection. If a
series or parallel resonance appears near one of the injection frequencies, then an estimate of voltage
distortion may be made based on the DR under study. Total voltage distortion can be estimated with a
harmonic power flow program, considering all other DR and harmonic-producing loads on the EPS. As
with transient programs, a harmonic power flow program should include unbalanced load and source
models.
However, comprehensive data on background sources and loads are usually not available, so harmonic
measurements would be recommended. Measurements should include both magnitude and angle of
harmonic current injections and the resulting harmonic voltage components. The monitoring period should
cover at least one week prior to DR commissioning and one week after. At relatively little expense, the
measurements help to calibrate the study model and establish whether DR contributes to harmonic
distortion problems. Measurements can be represented with either time-varying profiles or probability
distributions. The limits in IEEE Std 519 are to be exceeded no more than 1 hour in 24 hours, or about
4% of the time.
Some harmonic issues are not yet covered in IEEE Std 519, including inter-harmonics and possible
interference with ripple control frequencies. These problems are less common, but the study engineer
should be cognizant of them.
9.7.3 Study ID S4.3Harmonics resonance
Some DR may cause harmonic distortion problems on an electric power system if resonances in the system
align with the harmonic frequencies produced by the DR. If capacitors are located on the distribution feeder
as shown in Figure 1, both parallel and series resonant circuits are formed with the system reactances. A
resonance occurs whenever the equivalent capacitive reactance equals the equivalent inductive reactance in
a current loop.
One harmonic resonance problem of particular interest occurs when a switching inverter is installed in a
system that is resonant at frequencies produced by the inverter switching process. The capacitance involved
in the resonance can be cable capacitance if the inverter is connected to an underground cable [B2].
84
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Figure 1 Typical DR installation where harmonic resonance

may exist between system reactances and the DR
Some induction generators are designed to be self-exciting using capacitors. While such generators are not
generally a significant source of harmonic currents, the added capacitance for excitation could cause
harmonic resonance problems if the system resonant frequency is near one of the harmonics that is
generated by a harmonic source near the induction machine interconnect. For the example in Figure 2, a
parallel resonance path is created with the equivalent source reactance. The resonance occurs at the
frequency where the impedances of the capacitor and the system are equal.
Figure 2 Parallel resonance created by local capacitance

Under this condition, the resonance harmonic, n, is:
Where n is the harmonic number.
For instance, if n=5, the frequency is 300 Hz on a 60 Hz system. This is usually an undesirable frequency to
have a resonance because it is near one of the most common harmonics that is generated by power system
harmonic sources. An amplification of harmonics at that frequency is likely to occur, resulting in noticeable
harmonic distortion.
To fully evaluate complex harmonic cases, a harmonics simulation program is often used. The data needed
includes the harmonic output characteristics of the DR and DR site. Measurements may also be needed to
characterize the problem or determine the solution [B15].
85
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
9.7.4 Study ID S4.4Flicker
A flicker study looks at the potential for DR to produce noticeable changes in output from incandescent
lighting caused by voltage fluctuations on the Area EPS. The study should consider the Area EPS
configuration, DR interconnection configuration and equipment, and Area EPS protection and coordination
schemes. The study should also reflect the impact of DR under varying expected topologies and loading
conditions.
Flicker caused by DR could occur on any radial distribution system. The risk of flicker should be evaluated
for any type of distribution system. It can be the result of starting a machine (e.g., an induction generator)
or of changes in DR output that produce significant voltage change on the feeder. Any type of DR can
produce voltage fluctuations on the electric power system. For example, PV power output can drop from
100% to 20% of nameplate in less than one minute, and wind power output of a single turbine can vary
between 50% and 100% of nameplate in less than one minute. Conventional generation may also switch on
or off at any time, but less frequently. If a generator starts or its output fluctuates frequently enough, flicker
of lighting loads may be noticeable to customers. The analysis is more complicated if there are other flicker
sources which may have some degree of correlation. It is also possible for DR output variation to influence
voltage regulators or switched capacitors on the feeder, and for control system hunting to exacerbate the
flicker. Flicker studies would focus on the power quality impact of voltage fluctuations for customers near
the DR, including the DR itself.
The impacts may be quantified using different metrics:
Light flicker, Pst and Plt coefficients

Maximum step voltage change in percent for infrequent events
Increased number of regulator tap change operations in a period
Increased number of capacitor switching operations in a period
Comparison to the ITIC (CBEMA-2000) or other equipment curves
Evaluation of the percentage steady state voltage change, between full-on and full-off generation, may be
done with basic circuit analyses Equation (2) and Equation (3):
100
Vdrop = ( R1 + jX 1 )( Pn jQn ) (0) (2)
U n2
dV
=(100 + ReVdrop )2 + (ImVdrop )2 100 (0) (3)
Un
where
R1 and X1 are the positive sequence impedances in ohms between the Area EPS equivalent voltage source
and the PCC
Pn and Qn are the real and reactive generation in MW or MVA
Un is the nominal line-to-line voltage in kV
This provides a quick way of screening for potential flicker problems, and for voltage changes over the 5%
limit specified in IEEE Std 1547. When Qn is negative, the DR absorbs reactive power and the step
voltage change is minimized.
IEEE Std 519-1992 and IEEE Std 141-1993 present curves that show acceptable flicker limits for
incandescent lights used by a large number of Area EPS operators. The frequency content is extremely
important to determine whether flicker levels are observable (or objectionable). The typical frequency
86
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
range of observable flicker is from 0.5 Hz to 30.0 Hz, with observable voltage change magnitudes starting
at less than 1%. The most sensitive frequency range for flicker is approximately 5 Hz to 10 Hz. In essence,
this means that the human eye is more susceptible to voltage fluctuations in the range of 5 Hz to 10 Hz. As
the frequency of flicker increases or decreases, the human eye generally becomes more tolerant to
luminance fluctuations.
Historically, voltage fluctuations that caused flicker were measured with fast-time-constant rms meters,
load duty cycles, and a strip chart or similar recorder. This simple method works only for single frequencies
of flicker. IEEE Std 1453-2004 adopted the flicker evaluation and measurement methods in IEC 61000-
3-3, IEC 61000-3-5, IEC 61000-3-7, and IEC 61000-4-15. IEC 61000-4-15, the flicker meter specification,
was adopted as a normative annex of IEEE Std 1453-2004. The IEC flicker meter contains five
functional blocks, which can be implemented in hardware for an instrument or in software for processing of
simulation results. These blocks are as follows:
Input voltage scaling interface and calibration circuit

Demodulator; squares the scaled input voltage, simulating behavior of a lamp
Two cascaded filters; the first one eliminates the dc offset and second harmonic voltage, and the
second one simulates the borderline flicker perception curve for a 60 W incandescent lamp
Squaring and smoothing filters
Statistical processing of the output levels to produce a single output, Pst
The IEC flicker meter measures voltage fluctuations, weighted as a function of frequency to produce one
output value, but it also embeds the characteristics of incandescent lamps. Newer lamp types, and other
load types, should probably weigh the voltage fluctuations differently to evaluate the impact. The Pst output
is defined for a 10 minute period. A long-term flicker severity, Plt, is defined over a two hour period by the
cubic geometric mean of 12 consecutive Pst samples. This method produces an output for any voltage
fluctuation within the previous two hours, albeit weighted for incandescent lamps.
The IEC flicker meter performance test specifies that the Pst output should range from 0.95 p.u. to 1.05 p.u.
during any of the regular rectangular voltage changes listed in Table 5, for a 60 Hz system.
Table 5 Some voltage fluctuations producing PST = 1.0

Events per minute % Voltage change
1 3.166
2 2.568
7 1.695
39 1.044
110 0.841
1620 0.547
Each rectangular fluctuation period produces two changes, one up and one down. The magnitude V/V is
the min-to-max variation, divided by the average voltage, such that V/V of 20% means a variation from
-10% to +10% of the average.
IEEE Std 1453-2004 superseded most of IEEE Std 141-1993 and the flicker sections of IEEE Std
519-1992. The main body of IEEE Std 1453-2004 stated that limitations from IEEE Std 141-1993
were still useful for infrequent events because the IEC flicker meter works best for periods of 1 hour or
less. An informative annex gives the percent voltage dip from IEEE Std 141-1993 as 2.7% for perception
and 6% for irritation, at 1 dip per hour. In IEC terms, these would be equivalent to 5.4% and 12%,
respectively, at 0.017 changes per minute.
The main body of IEEE Std 1453-2004 adopted flicker compatibility limits and planning levels. The
compatibility limit is the severity level at which customer complaints are likely to occur. The planning level
87
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
is used to set limits on new loads (or DR), which have to be coordinated with fluctuating loads on the
system. These levels are shown in Table 6.
Table 6 Acceptable flicker severity levels

Flicker severity level Compatibility level PlanningMV PlanningHV and EHV
Pst [10-min] 1.0 0.9 0.8
Plt [120-min] 0.8 0.7 0.6
For DR applied on medium-voltage systems, the applicable planning limits would be Pst = 0.9 and Plt = 0.7.
These should be exceeded no more than 1% of the time. Higher flicker levels may be allowed at the
discretion of the Area EPS operator.
On low-voltage systems, the compatibility limits may be allowed, Pst = 1.0 and Plt = 0.8. These should be
exceeded no more than 5% of the time and should not propagate to other customer loads connected to the
Area EPS.
DR units will meet the flicker planning level if the single-frequency power variation from the unit (S)
compared with the available short-circuit capacity (SSC) of the Area EPS at the PCC is within the limits
described in Table 7.
Table 7 Acceptable voltage changes as a function of (S/SSC)max
Voltage changes per minute ( r ) (S/SSC)max, %
r >200 0.15
10 r 200 0.23
r <10 0.46
If the DR power does not vary at a single frequency, then a simple curve or table evaluation does not apply.
In particular, vendor test reports provide for a complete flicker evaluation of wind turbines. The applicable
standard is IEC 61400-21 on power quality characteristics of grid-connected wind turbines. IEEE Std
1453.1-2012 provides guidance on applying IEEE Std 1453-2011.
10. Data requirements

This clause summarizes the DR and Area EPS data requirements to conduct three main types of impact
studies: 1) preliminary studies, 2) conventional studies, and 3) special studies.
The data items are partitioned into lists, moving from simpler studies to more complicated studies. The DR
data may be collected in the study stages (preliminary, conventional, and special) rather than for each
individual study. This presents two opposing forces on the study engineer: first to request all needed DR
data at one time, and second to avoid requesting details that will not or cannot be used in the study.
Therefore, Clause 9 of this document should be reviewed before attempting to collect DR transient models
or other data required by special studies.
Once the DR design is completed, the Area EPS operator could benefit from receiving final design
specifications to help perform future impact studies of other DR.
The Area EPS data collection will be more efficient if supporting electronic databases and software tools
already exist. This could mean that feeder electrical models are built and maintained for voltage drop and
88
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
overcurrent protection studies, a geographical information system (GIS) contains an up-to-date electrical
model, feeder and customer load measurements are readily available, etc.
Table 8 provides a list of the various types of data that may be required for a complete study, including:
Data for preliminary review studies

Data for conventional studies
Data for power flow studies
Data for system protection studies
Data for special studies
Data for quasi-static studies
Data for dynamic studies
Data for EMT simulation
Data for harmonics and flicker studies
The data for each of the listed study categories may need to be more detailed for conventional and special
studies. The extent of data requirements for a DR preliminary study is also different with those of a DR
conventional or special impact study as indicated in the following subclauses. Additionally, Annex B
provides example data for impact studies. However, it is not an exhaustive list of data and should not be
considered typical data.
89
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Table 8 Overview of typical types of data for different studies

Data types Preliminary Study category
review Conventional Special
Steady state simulation System protection Quasi-static Dynamic EMT simulation Harmonics
and flicker
One-line diagram of DR facility
One-line diagram of Area EPS including protection devices
Three-line diagram of Area EPS including protection devices
Relay and metering one- and three-line diagrams
Trip circuit diagrams
Schematic diagrams of protection, control, and monitoring for DR and Area EPS
System operation and feeder configurations
Protective device functions, ratings, settings, and interrupting rating
Operation characteristicsdaily, seasonal, etc.a
Line section maximum and minimum load
Feeder loads
On-site load
Metering capabilities of feeder and substation equipment
Total maximum generation on each line section
Type of energy conversion technology
DRrotating machine-based generation characteristics
DRpower electronic-based generation/storage characteristics
Inverter maximum current output
Main grid equivalent source
Short-circuit model of Area EPS
Transient (electromagnetic transient type) DR model
Dynamic DR model
Power quality test report for DER, specifically wind turbines
Harmonic spectrum data and THD for DR and EPS
Climate datairradiance, wind speed, ambient temperature
Interconnection transformer
Substation transformers
Grounding configuration and locations (ground banks)
Sectionalizing and automatic switches
Automatic reconfiguration scheme information
Feeder section (OH/UG)
Cable and line data
Voltage regulators and LTC
Capacitor bank and d-SVC/d-STATCOM
Surge arresters
a
Needed for Study C3Operational characteristics
90
Authorized licensed use limited to: Universidad Tecnologica de Pereira. Downloaded on June 21,2016 at 20:50:08 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restriction
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
10.1 Data requirements and modeling for preliminary review studies
An exchange of preliminary data can be very useful in the early stages of a DR interconnect evaluation.
This exchange offers the Area EPS an opportunity to advise the DR applicant of particular interconnection
requirements. It may also help the DR applicant choose the most advantageous DR sizes and/or PCC. The
listed data will suffice for assessment of circuit ampacity, voltage fluctuation magnitudes, and potentials for
reverse power flow or unintended islanding.
For the purpose of preliminary studies, the assumption is that a circuit model of the Area EPS is available
or can be easily created. The model does not need to include DR model. In fact, preliminary studies are
geared toward utilization of the existing information and knowledge regarding the system characteristics.
The following data is needed to build an Area EPS model if it does not exist:
EPS one-line diagram showing the equivalent source (substation), operating and nominal source
voltages, line sections (downstream of equivalent source), and circuit equipment.
The Area EPS source substation values for the Thevenin equivalent impedance of the source, base
power and base voltage of the aforementioned impedance, three-phase and single-phase fault
current values at the bus where the Thevenin equivalent impedance is established.
Line section values for the length, the number of phases and size of each conductor including the
neutral conductor, the phase and neutral spacing data (for calculation of the primitive impedance
matrix of each line section, the positive and zero sequence impedance and susceptance of each line
section).
Information about major spot loads and load center for distributed loads.
Basic DR data for preliminary studies includes:
DR type and interface specifications (e.g., nameplate rating)

Primary energy source (e.g., fuel, prime mover, renewable source)
Nameplate specifications of the overall DR plant
Point of common coupling and/or point of DR connection
DR certification and standard compliance
General information about DR protection characteristics, grounding, and level of current
contribution to fault
Maximum/minimum of on-site load (station load)
10.1.1 Criteria ID P1Use of certified DR equipment
Data to assess this criterion includes a certified test report or letter from the DR equipment manufacturer or
supplier indicating the proposed DR equipment has been listed by an accredited test laboratory to meet the
applicable standard(s) (e.g., UL 1741).
10.1.2 Criteria ID P2Potential for unintended islands
There are three sub-criteria associated with the P2 criterion as described in 10.1.2.1 through 10.1.2.3.
91
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
10.1.2.1 Sub-criteria ID P2.1DR does not export power to the Area EPS at the PCC
Data to assess this criterion includes the following DR facility drawings:
EPS one-line diagram showing line section protective device and all DRs interconnected to the line
section.
Relay and metering one-line and three-line diagrams which show either a reverse power relay
(32R) or a forward power relay (32F) at the point of common coupling; current and voltage circuits
of these relays need to be wired correctly so that they sense power flow in the appropriate direction.
Trip circuit diagram of the intertie breaker or switch which shows tripping of these devices by the
32R or 32F relay after a time delay deemed to be appropriate by the Area EPS operator.
10.1.2.2 Sub-criteria ID P2.2DR production relative to served load (penetration is small)
Data to assess this criterion includes:
Area EPS one-line diagram showing line section protective device and all DRs interconnected to
the line section,
The line section maximum or minimum load for the time period all line section DRs are expected
to operate, and
Total maximum generation capacity of all line section DRs.
10.1.2.3 Sub-criteria ID P2.3DR interconnection incorporates acceptable anti-islanding

protective features
Data to assess this criterion include the Area EPS one-line diagram showing:
The line section protective device

All DRs interconnected to the line section
Area EPS one-line diagram and equivalent representation
Energy conversion technology type of each DR (e.g., inverter, synchronous generator, or induction
generator)
Each DR type (e.g., single-phase or three-phase)
DR anti-islanding test certificate and test condition description
Type and winding configurations (e.g., delta, wye,) of transformer through which each DR is
interconnected to the line section, and transformer neutral impedance, if used
Total maximum generation capacity of all line section DRs
10.1.3 Criteria ID P3Impacts on EPS equipment loading under all steady state conditions
There are two sub-criteria associated with the P3 criterion as described in 10.1.3.1 and 10.1.3.2.
10.1.3.1 Sub-criteria P3.1Gross kVA rating of the DR is no greater than the kVA rating of
the EPS transformer serving the facility on a per phase basis
Data to assess this criterion include the following:
The aggregate rated kVA power output of all DR connected to the EPS transformer.
92
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
The rated kVA power capability of the EPS transformer as determined by the EPS transformer
owner. This may differ from nameplate rating established by the transformer manufacturer.
10.1.3.2 Sub-criteria ID P3.2Gross kVA rating of the DR on a particular feeder or

substation is no greater than the feeder or substation rating
Data to assess this criterion for a particular feeder include:
The aggregate rated kVA output capability of all DR connected to the feeder
The rated kVA power capability of the interconnecting feeder as determined by the Area EPS
operator
10.1.4 Criteria ID P4Impacts on system protection, fault conditions, and arc flash rating
There are four sub-criteria associated with the P4 criterion as described below.
10.1.4.1 Sub-criteria ID P4.1DR can not cause any protective device or circuit component
to exceed 85% to 90% of the short-circuit interrupting capability
Data to assess this criterion include the Area EPS one-line diagram showing:
A short-circuit model of the Area EPS or data to develop a model

All protective devices and interrupting rating of each
All DRs interconnected to each line section
Proposed location of the new DR facility
Energy conversion technology type of each DR (e.g., inverter, synchronous generator, or induction
generator)
Each DR type (e.g., single-phase or three-phase)
Type and winding configurations (e.g., delta, wye) of transformer through which each DR is
interconnected to the line section
For all synchronous machine DR, the direct axis sub-transient reactance value and X/R ratio
For all induction machine DR, the short-circuit or locked rotor reactance and X/R ratio
For all inverter-based DR, the maximum fault current output and duration
For each transformer in each DR (single-phase or three-phase), the following nameplate values:
power rating, impedance, X/R ratio, and power and voltage base of impedance
10.1.4.2 Sub-criteria ID P4.2Aggregate DR on circuit does not contribute more than 10%
of the circuits maximum fault current at the primary voltage point nearest the PCC
Data to assess this sub-criterion is similar to data for criterion P4.1.
10.1.4.3 Sub-criteria ID P4.3DR will interconnect with an Area EPS having radial topology
Data to assess this criterion is Area EPS one-line diagram showing proposed location of DR facility is
served by radial distribution feeders.
93
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
10.1.4.4 Sub-criteria ID P4.4DR will not cause temporary overvoltages during a phase-to-
ground fault
This criterion is generally applicable when the primary distribution line serving the DR is of a three-wire
configuration, or a four-wire configuration with effectively grounded three-phase interconnection, or a
DRs distribution transformer is single-phase connected in a line-to-neutral configuration.
Data to assess this criterion includes:
Area EPS one-line diagram showing line section protective device and all DRs interconnected to
the line section
Information about substation transformer winding configuration and neutral impedances
The line section maximum and minimum load for the time period all line section DRs are expected
to operate
Total maximum generation capacity of all line section DRs
10.1.4.5 Sub-criteria ID P4.5Existing protection schemes are configured to allow for DR

connected to the Area EPS
Data to assess this criterion is similar to data for criterion P4.1 with the addition of data related to
protective device settings.
10.1.5 Criteria ID P5Impacts on voltage regulation within the EPS under steady state
conditions
10.1.5.1 Sub-criteria ID P5.1DR PCC is a relatively strong or stiff location within the Area
EPS
Data to assess this criterion includes Area EPS one-line showing:
Existing voltage regulators (including transformer load tap changers) and their settings
Existing Area EPS capacitor banks (fixed and switched) and control settings of the switched
capacitors
Location of existing and proposed DRs, maximum output capability of each, and settings of the
excitation control schemes
Area EPS peak and valley loads at the substation, feeder electronic reclosers, and large spot loads
10.1.5.2 Sub-criteria ID P5.2DR would not be anticipated to result in voltage rising above
the specified limits in the Area EPS
Data to assess this criterion is similar to that of 10.1.5.1.
10.1.5.3 Sub-criteria ID P5.3Loss of DR or variation in output of DR would not be

anticipated to result in voltage in the Area EPS falling below specified limits
94
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
10.1.5.4 Sub-criteria ID P5.4Variation in output of DR would not be anticipated to

necessitate changes in settings of Area EPS voltage regulating devices
Data to assess this criterion include a three-line diagram that shows the following:
The single-phase transformer and the following attributes: power rating, impedance, X/R ratio, and
nameplate voltage ratings
All DRs served by the transformer and the following attributes of each: maximum output capability
of each and settings of excitation control scheme
Peak and valley load demands for the transformer for the time period all DRs are expected to be
operational
10.1.5.5 Sub-criteria ID P5.5DR is not expected to result in high voltage on shared

secondary
10.1.6 Criteria ID P6Impacts on EPS power quality
10.1.6.1 Sub-criteria ID P6.1DR operation will not cause flicker exceeding limits at the
PCC
Frequent voltage variations (flicker) level at the PCC caused by DR should not exceed the limits identified
in IEEE Std 1453.
For evaluation of potential flicker issues during preliminary studies, generally the system equivalent
impedance (R + jX) at the PCC is used along with information from the DR power quality test report (if
available) and the DR size. If a power quality test report is not available and there seems to be potential for
flicker issues, detailed routine studies and/or field monitoring (in two stages of pre and post
commissioning) can be suggested. For DR under consideration, DR start up real and reactive power
information is needed.
10.1.6.2 Sub-criteria ID P6.2Real and reactive power flow from DR will not cause Area
EPS voltage sags and swells
10.1.6.3 Sub-criteria ID P6.3DR operation will not cause harmonics at the PCC to exceed
allowed limits
Data to assess this criterion is harmonic spectrum data for the DR (based on published DR data sheet) and
total harmonic distortion (THD) of voltage for the grid. The intent at this stage is not to perform detailed
harmonic analysis, and only to determine if additional study is needed.
95
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
10.2 Data requirements for conventional studies
The PCC is an important location to understand data related to the Area EPS and the DR. Typical
conventional studies may include: power flow, short-circuit, protection coordination, and unintentional
islanding studies.
10.2.1 DR data for conventional studies
The DR interconnect application should include one data submittal sufficient for power flow and short-
circuit studies.
10.2.1.1 General DR data
General interface data from the customer includes the following:
A legible one-line relay and metering diagram showing the configuration of all generating facility
equipment, transformers, current and potential circuits, and protection and control schemes. The
one-line diagram should be a separate diagram specific to the application and clearly illustrate the
following items:
PCC to the Area EPS
Protective devices and relays need to indicate what they trip
Synchronizing or synch check relays or devices need to indicate which voltages are being
used for synchronizing
Relay nomenclature and type
Relay device numbers (see IEEE Std C37.2)
If the protective device is a fuse, provide the type, size, and manufacturer
All interrupting devices need to be uniquely identified and verifiable
Lockable line sectioning devices
Clear indication of where the DR unit will be electrically located
Other DR units at this facility and their interconnection
DR unit size, type, power factor, voltage, and grounding information
Transformer (if customer owned) size, winding configuration, grounding configuration,
impedance, and any transformer protection
Power factor correction equipment data (kVAr steps, configuration, voltage)
Current sensing devices, class, ratio, and configuration
Voltage sensing devices, ratio, and configuration
Interlocking between tripping devices (if applicable)
Metering point
The one-line should not include:
Test procedures
Equipment grounding diagrams
96
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Logic diagrams
Riser diagrams
PLC code
System operating procedures
Legible three-line ac diagram showing the current and potential circuits for protection and control
schemes. This is referred to as an ac key elementary diagram. This diagram should include the
following:
Phase references
Relay test block locations
CT short-circuit switches
VT fuses
All CT and VT selection switches
CT and VT configuration connections
CT and VT ratios
Neutral grounding positions on secondary CT and VT circuits
Secondary circuit connections to relays and metering equipment
Interrupting devices
The ac elementary diagram should not include the following:
Test procedures
Equipment grounding diagrams
Logic diagrams
Riser diagrams
PLC code
System operating procedures
Site documentation that indicates the precise physical location of the proposed generating facility
(e.g., USGS topographic map or other diagram or documentation)
Documentation that describes and details the functions and operation of the protection and control
schemes
Proposed location of protective interface equipment on property (if different from interconnection
customers address)
Copies of schematic drawings for all protection and control circuits, relay trip circuits, and
alarm/monitoring circuits (if applicable). This is also referred to as a dc key elementary diagram.
The dc elementary diagram needs to include the following:
Trip circuits for interface breaker or switching devices
Close circuits for interface breaker or switching devices
Trip coil monitoring devices and breaker fail circuits
Loss of dc (fuse fail on trip circuit or relay power supply) and relay fail alarm circuits
DC fuses for trip coil, control circuits, etc., if used
97
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Site system operating procedure (SOP) documentation detailing all the different modes of operation
and system configuration. The SOPs need to include the following:
All possible system configurations
Complete steps for transitioning from one configuration to all other possible configurations
References to the one-line diagram interrupting and switching devices
Changes to relaying or system control functions and generator control functions for the
different configurations
Relevant study data as detailed in Clause 10
10.2.1.2 C1DR data for steady state simulation
The following power flow study data should be included with the DR application:
Screening data, if not already provided:

Type of DRprimary energy source and interface (e.g., synchronous machine, induction
machine, power electronic converter)
DR unit rating (rated voltage, rated power or MVA, rated frequency) and number of units.
Minimum and maximum real power limits
Minimum and maximum reactive power limits
Numbers and sizes of power flow controllers such as capacitor banks, d-SVC, d-STATCOM, etc.
Proposed load, including specific large motor sizes
Customer existing interconnection type and size
Maximum export capability requested (kW and kVAr)
Interconnection transformer data:
Single-phase/three-phase
Size (kVA) including base rating and additional rating for fan cooling, etc.
Transformer impedance (%) on (kVA Base)
Primary and secondary voltage ratings (including tap settings)
Primary and secondary connection types (e.g., delta, wye, grounded, or ungrounded)
Neutral grounding impedance, if applicable
Special considerations (e.g., additional windings, cooling, special type, core construction,
etc.)
Load loss watts values (typically estimated at 5% to 10% of nameplate impedance if load loss
watts values are not specified)
10.2.1.3 C2DR data for system protection studies
In addition to the data above, the following protection study data should be included with the DR
application:
Fault contribution from the DR, excluding transformer, specified by one of the following:
98
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
For synchronous machines, the synchronous, transient, and sub-transient reactances and time
constants.
For induction machines, the equivalent fault reactance, which may be inferred from locked-
rotor conditions in the absence of other information.
For power electronic interfaces, the maximum level and time duration of current output into a
terminal fault. More than one time interval may be specified to account for control and
protection system operation.
Length, type, and impedance of overhead line or cable segments connecting any DR units and
interconnection transformers with the PCC
Transformer fuse data (if applicable)
Copy of fuse manufacturers minimum melt and total clearing time-current curves
Fuse manufacturer
Type
Size
Characteristic
Interconnecting circuit breaker (if applicable, for each LV or MV breaker)
Manufacturer
Type
Load rating (amps)
Interrupting rating (amps)
Maximum fault current rating
Clearing time (cycles)
Close speed
Sources of grounding at interface voltage
If wye-wye transformers are used, lower voltage grounding configuration data may be needed
Recloser at the PCC (if applicable)
Manufacturer, type, load current rating, fault current rating
Trip curve selections for both phase and ground trip
Interconnection protective relays (if applicable, for each relay)
All interface protection settings values
Manufacturer
Type
Style, catalog number
Proposed settings
Relay accuracy and settings ranges
Standards to which device is compliant
Current transformer data (if applicable, for each transformer)
99
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Copy of manufacturers excitation and ratio correction curves

Manufacturer
Type
Accuracy class
Proposed ratio connection
Voltage transformer data (if applicable, for each transformer)
Manufacturer
VA rating
Type
Accuracy class
Proposed ratio connection
10.2.1.4 C3DR data for operational characteristics studies
Operational characteristics of the DR are needed for this study. This includes (as a minimum):
A one-line diagram including the location of the interconnection on the Area EPS
Generation control schemes, if dispatchable, and any seasonal adjustment
10.2.2 Area EPS data for conventional studies
The data to study the interaction between the Area EPS and proposed DR will primarily be found in the
power flow and short-circuit models maintained by the Area EPS operator. These models should include
proposed and approved DR for proper coordination. Studies using these models should emulate the
operating guidelines that have been developed. Revisions to the operating guidelines may be proposed as a
result of these studiesto be followed by a careful review of the possible ramifications of the proposed
change.
10.2.2.1 Data from the Area EPS operator
Data from the Area EPS operator includes the following:
Existing and planned future (if known) circuit configurations

Protection and control schemes applicable to the site
Self-healing or auto restoration schemes applicable to the site
Interconnection transformer ground source requirements
Screening data, if not already provided:
Voltage level and number of phases
System strength and X/R ratios at the PCC, for both single-phase and three-phase faults, or
positive sequence and negative sequence
Minimum and maximum load on the connected circuit
Minimum and maximum load on the smallest switched segment serving the PCC
Numbers and sizes of DR already connected to the circuit
Numbers and sizes of DR already on the smallest switched segment serving the PCC
100
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
10.2.2.2 C1Area EPS data for steady state simulation
The Area EPS data to prepare power flow studies for proposed DR units includes:
Area EPS voltage levels and limits

Voltage regulator settings
Control mode (e.g., locked forward, reverse, co-gen, bidirectional, etc.)
Target voltage and bandwidth (at load center or regulator terminal)
VT and CT ratios if parameters are in per unit
Compensator R and X settings in forward and reverse directions
Permissible upper and lower voltage limits for the regulator terminal, as determined by R and
X settings (example is protection limits for the device closest to the voltage regulator)
Switched capacitor bank settings
Mode of automatic control (e.g., voltage, current, reactive power, temperature, time of day,
manual, etc.)
Target voltage and bandwidth, or schedule of manual switching
VT and CT ratios if parameters are in per unit
Single-phase or three-phase control
Neutral grounding
Area EPS connectivity information including the connection point for the proposed DR
Positive sequence impedance data for the connected branches and equipment
Positive sequence impedance equivalent circuit data looking from the pertinent portions of the
distribution system to the Area EPS
Work in progress that affects the connected circuit (anywhere from design to construction) for
transmission and distribution
Circuit demand load, nominal load, and low load conditions, or a load profile, or a load duration
curve
Customer loading on the Area EPS, either individual or aggregated
Physical limitations (current carrying capacity, customer voltage limits) of the Area EPS system
elements
Predicted increases in area load caused by adding new customers and by increased usage of
existing customers
Existing aggregate generation and DR already on the EPS and predicted increases of DR in the
distribution area
Effects of customer energy usage patterns on daily and seasonal power flows on the Area EPS
Season-specific operation practices
Metering capabilities of field and substation equipment
Utility generation and non-utility generation capacities and schedules
Automatic restoration schemes or self-healing network configurations
101
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
10.2.2.3 C2Area EPS data for system protection studies
In addition to power flow study data, the Area EPS data to prepare protection studies for proposed DR units
includes:
Negative and zero sequence impedance data for the connected branches and equipment, including
the source equivalents
Negative and zero sequence impedance data on equivalent circuits from alternate feeds
Existing facility fault contribution
Physical limitations (duty) of the Area EPS system elements
Existing relay settings for protective devices in the Area EPS
Injection points for utility generation, non-utility generation, large customer motors, and other
sources of fault current
Transfer trip or trip blocking capabilities between Area EPS and DR
Automatic restoration schemes or self-healing network configurations and arc flash energy level
requirements
10.2.2.4 C3Area EPS data for operational characteristics studies
Operational characteristics of the Area EPS with respect to the location of the DR are needed for this study.
At minimum, this includes:
A one-line diagram including the location of the interconnection on the Area EPS
Load shedding schemes, as applicable to the Area EPS
Minimum and maximum load for the Area EPS
Acceptable voltage ranges for contingency operation
Seasonally acceptable short-term and long-term thermal limits of the Area EPS
10.3 Data requirements for special studies
Special studies typically include detailed (comprehensive) modeling of DR and Area EPS to investigate
impact on power quality (harmonics, flicker), system dynamics, and transients.
10.3.1 DR data required for special impact study: DR data for Study ID S1 quasi-static and
Study ID S2 dynamic studies
DR data for quasi-static and dynamic studies should include the best available dynamic model for the DR
(including the controls). For synchronous machines, induction generators, or wind turbines, the model may
be provided in parameters for an IEEE-sponsored format (e.g., IEEE Std 421.5, PSDP committee
papers). These models are well-established for synchronous machines, including the excitation system,
governor system, and mechanical inertia. Similar IEEE-sponsored generic models are under development
for wind turbines. These established model structures have been implemented in many commercial
software programs for transmission system analysis. Most of these models are positive sequence only and
need to be used with a three-phase balanced Area EPS model.
The established models usually do not work with power electronic DR interfaces, nor do they work with a
single-phase or unbalanced Area EPS model. In such cases, two possibilities are:
102
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Use a transient DR model to conduct the dynamic study in an electromagnetic transients program
(EMTP type software tools).
Obtain a user model of the DR. This has to be coded, compiled, and linked for the dynamic
simulation program to be used in the study. The model developer and user may need matching
versions of the dynamic simulation program.
Both of these options benefit from participation and support from the DR technology vendor.
10.3.2 DR data for Study ID S3 EMT simulation studies
There may be circumstances requiring a transient model of the DR and its interface. In the case of
conventional synchronous generators, this poses little technical difficulty because the dynamic model can
be readily translated for use in an EMTP. Control system block diagrams for the excitation system and
governor can also be implemented in any available EMTP type software tools. For this kind of DR, the data
for transient and dynamic studies are nearly the same and should include zero sequence and neutral
impedance data.
For DR other than synchronous generators, a transient model is much more difficult to obtain. In practice,
such models have to be obtained from the DR technology vendor and used with their permission. The
model may only be available to use with one program. Other programs may have the technical capability of
running the model, but the DR vendor may not be willing to invest the time in converting a model from one
program to another.
Generic DR transient models need to be used with great caution because they do not include proprietary
control and protection system details, which could be crucial in the transient phenomena under study. With
access to all of the design details, a transient model could be developed from scratch. However, special
expertise is needed, it usually takes too long for a DR impact study, and data is still needed to verify the
model. These are reasons why only vendor-supplied DR transient models should be used for impact studies,
except for the case of synchronous generators without a power electronic interface.
10.3.3 DR data for Study ID S4 harmonic and flicker studies
DR data for harmonic and flicker studies include the following:
Maximum harmonic current injections according to IEEE Std 519

For wind turbines, a wind power quality test report according to IEC 61400-21
Characteristics of perturbing loads at the DR facility
If harmonic studies are performed by Fourier analysis of time-domain waveforms, then a transient model of
the DR is needed.
10.3.4 Area EPS data for special impact study
10.3.4.1 Area EPS data for Study ID S1 quasi-static and Study ID S2 dynamics studies
In addition to short-circuit study data, Area EPS data to prepare dynamic studies for proposed DR units
includes:
Dynamic model for existing generators represented in the Area EPS, including existing and
approved DR units.
103
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Modeling characteristics of loads in the Area EPS (e.g., constant power, constant current, constant
impedance, or combinations thereof).
Dynamic models for existing power controllers such as d-SVC, d-STATCOM, UPFC, etc.
Dynamic model of conventional voltage control devices such as under load tap changer (LTC), line
voltage regulator (VR), and switched shunt capacitors. The model should include the control
aspects and delays associated with tap changer operation or capacitor switching in/out.
A dynamic model for existing generators or flow controllers may fit a standard IEEE format. It should have
been developed and tested for the dynamic simulation program that will be used in the study, including
applicable control and protection systems (machine reactances and time constants, mechanical inertia,
excitation system, governor system, voltage regulator, real or reactive power flow control, etc.).
10.3.4.2 Area EPS data for Study ID S3 EMT simulation studies
In addition to harmonics and dynamics study data, the following Area EPS data is needed if available (if
not, need to estimate) to prepare transient studies of the proposed DR units:
Physical overhead line and cable data (conductor, insulating material, spacing, layer thicknesses,
and soil resistivity data). These may be processed through line and cable parameter calculation
routines to derive transient models.
Transformer data sheet information (MVA rating, voltage levels, impedance and loss test results,
saturation characteristics, wye or delta connection, tap settings, grounding impedance, zero-
sequence test results). This data may be processed through a specialized parameter calculation
routine to derive transient models.
Transient model of existing power flow controllers (STATCOM, UPFC, etc.). Use a dynamic
model if the transient model is not available.
Detailed model of conventional voltage control devices such as LTC, line VR, and switched shunt
capacitors. The model should include the control aspects and delays associated with tap changer
operation or capacitor switching in/out.
Data for transient models of existing DR units. A dynamic model can be used if the transient model
is not available.
Surge arrester data.
Instrument transformer capacitancecapacitance coupled voltage transformer (CCVT).
For synchronous machines, a dynamic model is convertible to a transient model, but this may not be true of
other generator technologies or power electronic devices. An approximate or generic transient model may
be acceptable if the device is not a direct subject of study.
10.3.4.3 Area EPS data for Study ID S4 harmonic and flicker studies
In addition to short-circuit study data, Area EPS data to prepare harmonic and flicker studies for proposed
DR units includes:
Cable and line charging values, both positive and zero sequence.
Power factor correction capacitor values, configuration, and location in the circuit.
Background levels of harmonic distortion, using measurements, earlier study results, or inferences
from any previous customer complaints.
Background level of flicker.
104
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
The harmonic study data can also be derived from a transient model of the Area EPS.
11. Impact mitigation overview

The results of the preliminary review, conventional distribution study, or special study may identify failure
of the DR project, as it is proposed, to meet established criteria. After such a failure to meet criteria is
identified, further study may help to better assess the situation. Further study may result in identifying the
degree to which the criteria is violated. The degree of criteria violation will help to determine potential
mitigation techniques and possibly determine if the project is feasible. The amount of study to assess
potential mitigation techniques is a matter of judgment and experience. In some cases, mitigation
techniques could be assessed based on preliminary criteria; but, in most cases, detailed studies need to be
performed before identifying mitigation techniques. Mitigation techniques are a solution for failure to meet
criteria of the pertinent conventional distribution studies (Clause 8) or special studies (Clause 9).
Mitigation techniques include changes needed to be made to the DR, changes to the Area EPS, or
combinations of both of these. Often there is more than one mitigation technique to any set of criteria
violations. Mitigation techniques may be as simple as changing equipment settings or upgrading some
equipment. In some cases, mitigation techniques may be extensive including such items as replacing
substations, reconductoring distribution lines, establishing new distribution lines, or upgrading the
transmission system. In all cases, mitigation techniques are available to solve an issue identified in the
impact study; but, in some cases, the mitigation resources may be too large to make installation of the DR
practical.
Issues identified in impact studies can generally be classified in the following categories:
Potential for unintended islands upon separation from the greater Area EPS
Impact on EPS equipment loading under all steady state conditions
Impacts on system protection and fault conditions
Impacts on voltage regulation within the EPS under steady state conditions
Impacts on power quality
The following subclauses identify a representative sample of some potential mitigation solutions to specific
issues that may be identified in impact studies.
11.1 Potential solutions for unintended islands upon separation from the greater
Area EPS
Once the potential for unintended islanding is identified, mitigation techniques are usually focused on anti-
islanding protection. In some cases, a possible but a rarely used method is to mitigate the issue by
transfering load.
11.1.1 Example methods for mitigating unintended islanding
11.1.1.1 Issue: Insufficient anti-islanding protection is built in the DR protection schemes
Cause: Additional anti-islanding protection is needed due to Area EPS considerations and
potentially due to equipment not meeting the requirements of IEEE Std 1547.
105
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Potential solutions:
Use a DR that is certified to pass applicable non-islanding test. (See 8.4.1.3.2 of IEEE Std
1547.2 on non-islanding inverter for details.)
Use reverse power protection if the DR is not intended to supply Area EPS load (See 8.4.1.3.3
of IEEE Std 1547.2 for details.)
Provide tighter under voltage trip settings based on actual calculations for circumstances
expected
Coordinate protection devices based on actual calculations for circumstances expected
Use power factor control of synchronous generator excitation system (See 8.4.1.3.6 of IEEE
Std 1547.2 for details.)
Employ direct transfer trip (DTT) of DR upon opening of Area EPS protective device; this
applies to every device (See 8.4.1.3.7 of IEEE Std 1547.2 for details.)
11.1.2 Issue: Out of synch reclosing
Cause: Subsequent to fault and disconnection of the main source, if the first reclosing attempt of a
feeder recloser occurs prior to a DR disconnection because of unintended islanding, the two
systems may connect in an out-of-synch condition causing large in-rush current and a large voltage
spike.
Utilize secondary voltage supervision for a recloser to prevent reclosing on sensing of an
energized feeder (dead-line reclosing).
Block reclosing on the feeder or line section that has DR connected.
On feeders with potential of close match between load and generation, use transfer trip
schemes to trip DR prior to the first reclosing attempt.
11.1.3 Issue: Temporary overvoltage upon islanding of DR on line sections with generation
in excess of load (cycles)
Cause: Transient events are measured on the order of cycles. Certain power system events may
create a high voltage transient.
Utilization of instantaneous overvoltage protection settings on DR interconnection relay(s)
Specification of DR technology which uses control systems to limit temporary overvoltage in
islanded conditions
Review surge arrester voltage rating. The surge arrester voltage ratings may need to be
increased from normal levels, subject to maintaining adequate protective margins for the
insulation
A change in transformer connection type
Supplemental grounding transformers
Install a transfer trip scheme
Use an interconnection transformer winding configuration that provides a ground source.
However, this can upset ground fault coordination of protective devices and increase the
neutral unbalance currents
106
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Having the protection system disconnect DR before the Area EPS clears a fault
In the case of ferroresonance producing temporary overvoltage (TOV), three-pole switching
and certain transformer types and configurations are less susceptible to ferroresonance
problems
11.2 Potential solutions for impacts on EPS equipment loading under all steady
state conditions in violation of requirements
When a preliminary review or conventional distribution study identifies that the DR introduces the
potential for steady state operation of the Area EPS in excess of its ratings, mitigation techniques should be
considered. Operation in excess of ratings usually results in equipment overloads.
Criteria and identification. The potential for operation in excess of equipment ratings may occur
when the preliminary review or conventional distribution study identifies the potential for increased
current flow among line sections or through equipment due to the DR. The potential is often first
identified in the preliminary review as discussed in preliminary review criteria P3. This can be
further clarified by a steady state simulation study as shown in 8.2.
General mitigation techniques. Once the potential for operation in excess of equipment ratings is
identified, mitigation techniques are usually focused on upgrading affected equipment. In some
cases, line section reconfiguration may provide acceptable mitigation.
11.2.1 Example method for mitigating operation in excess of equipment ratings
11.2.1.1 Issue: Substation transformer and/or line sections are overloaded due to DR
Cause: DR causes line section and the substation transformer to be overloaded due to high
penetration of DR.
Upgrading substation transformers and reconductoring feeders to eliminate overloads
Move the DR closer to the substation source
Serve DR from a dedicated substation or dedicated feeder
11.3 Potential solutions for impacts on system protection and fault conditions in
violation of requirements
When a preliminary review or conventional distribution study identifies the potential for changes in the
system protection schemes or potential for the Area EPS to operate in excess of its fault ratings, mitigation
techniques should be considered.
Criteria and identification. Potential for changes in the system protection schemes are usually
identified in the preliminary review or conventional distribution studies. Special impact studies may
further identify changes needed to system protection schemes in order to mitigate particular
conditions identified in the subject studies. Potential for operation in excess of its fault ratings may
occur when a preliminary review or conventional distribution study identifies that the fault
contribution of the DR is substantial and when combined with existing system fault contribution
has the potential to exceed Area EPS equipment ratings. The potential may be first identified in the
preliminary review as discussed in preliminary review criteria P4. It is usually further clarified by a
short-circuit analysis as identified in 8.3.1.
107
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
General mitigation techniques. Mitigation techniques for changes in system protection schemes can
range from changes in settings to the installation of new protection equipment. Mitigation
techniques for Area EPS equipment operating in excess of ratings due to faults is usually focused
on upgrading equipment, limiting Area EPS fault current, limiting DR fault current, or
reconfiguring lines. In rare cases where the interrupting current is the limiting factor on fast clearing
protective devices, changes in protection settings may avoid the issue.
11.3.1 Example methods for mitigating Area EPS equipment operating in excess of ratings
due to faults
The following five subclauses are examples of methods for mitigating Area EPS equipment operating in
excess of ratings due to faults.
11.3.1.1 Issue: Aggregated DR contributes three phase fault current that results in
momentary and interrupting fault current at the substation to be in excess of ratings
Cause: Additional fault current contribution due to DR is added to area substation fault current to
create a higher fault current at all circuit breakers in the substation and at downstream equipment.
Replace affected equipment as needed at the substation and potentially on the downstream
circuit. Affected equipment may include circuit breakers, substation buses, fuses, etc.
Decrease fault current levels by decreasing fault contribution from DR. This may be resolved
by a different DR design, higher impedance DR transformers, or current limiting devices such
as series reactors. In some cases, connecting the DR to a different line may mitigate the
problem.
Decrease fault current levels by decreasing fault contribution from the Area EPS. This may be
resolved by a higher impedance substation transformer, current limiting devices such as series
reactors, or in rare cases connecting the substation to a different incoming line.
11.3.1.2 Issue: Recloser fuse mis-coordination for a fuse saving strategy during temporary
faults
Cause: Additional fault contribution from a DR located downstream of a faulted branch on

backbone feeder and/or de-sensitizing a recloser when DR is located after recloser but upstream of
faulted branch.
Re-coordinate the recloser-fuse taking into account the maximum DR fault contribution
Change the protection strategy to a fuse burning method
Replace fuse with a recloser to clear fault locally
11.3.1.3 Issue: Loss of system stability
Cause: Violation of stability criteria caused by a fault, motor starting, generation connection,
capacitor switching, voltage regulator action, transformer load tap changer (LTC) action, or under
frequency load shedding event.
Potential solutions. Mitigation options for stability concerns may include:
Facility additions.
108
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Modification of protective equipment.

Resetting of capacitor/regulator/LTC controls.
DTT to allow the system operators to manually or automatically separate the DR during de-
stabilizing events (e.g., when a large motor is about to start).
Other modifications to the system including remedial action schemes or special protection
systems. The system planner may need to determine critical clearing times to clear faults or
isolate devices, provide location and size for capacitors/regulators, or provide distribution
system modifications.
Options at the DR installation may include changing the DR inertia, adjusting exciter or
governor controls, adding voltage compensating devices, or instituting special protective
systems including isolation of the DR during fault conditions.
11.3.1.4 Issue: Mis-operation of a protection device due to upstream faults and/or fault on
adjacent feeders
Cause: Reverse power flow and fault back-feeding of a DR may cause tripping of a protection
device for faults not in the protection zone or may not trip for certain faults within the protection
zone.
Use directional protection schemes
Direct transfer trip from the substation to the DR is added
Automatic line reclosers are used to replace intermediate circuit fuses between the DR and the
source substation
Protective device settings and/or device protective functions are changed
Changes in operating practice of the DR to minimize potential for such issues, for example,
operating in an exclusively import state
11.3.2 Issue: Nuisance tripping of DR
Cause: Voltage fluctuations caused by large load changes and/or faults on adjacent feeders
Re-design voltage protection schemes for DR by utilizing voltage polarization and unbalance
detection supervision
Utilize fault ride-through capability of DRs
11.4 Potential solutions for impacts on voltage regulation within the EPS under
steady state conditions in violation of requirements
When a preliminary review, conventional distribution study, or special impact system study identifies a
potential for impacts on voltage regulation, mitigation techniques should be considered.
Criteria and identification. Potential impacts on voltage regulation include the potential for steady
state voltage violations and voltage imbalances. Causes of these potential impacts include the
existing voltage regulation systems on the Area EPS, the effect of DR voltage regulation systems,
as well as real and reactive power flow changes due to the DR.
109
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
The potential for violation of voltage regulation requirements may first be identified by preliminary
review as identified in preliminary review criteria P5. Conventional distribution studies (Clause 8)
that may further delineate this issue include steady state simulation (8.2), and protection (8.3).
Special impact studies that may provide more detailed understanding of the impact on voltage
regulation include quasi-static simulation (9.4) and dynamic simulation (9.5).
General mitigation techniques. Mitigation techniques for violation of voltage requirements may be
focused on re-assessing the performance of voltage regulation devices, defining the appropriate
voltage regulation requirements of the DR, and improving the impedance of the distribution system.
11.4.1 Example methods for mitigating violation of requirements
11.4.1.1 Issue: Steady state high and low voltage (minutes or longer)
Cause: High and low voltage conditions where DR and load are at a specified level representing a
single snapshot in time. Typically, steady state analysis is applied to the conditions that place the
most stress on the system. Because the DR injects power into the Area EPS, the worst case steady
state conditions may or may not be during peak load demand.
Install or upgrade line or bank LTCs
Change line or bank LTC settings
Install shunt capacitor banks
Change existing shunt capacitor switching bias points
Replace temperature or time-controlled capacitor switching with local voltage control, current
control, reactive power control, or centralized capacitor dispatch
Modify voltage regulator settings or provide voltage regulators designed to operate properly
with reverse power flow
Install shunt reactor banks
Change existing shunt reactor switching bias points
Operate the DR using an absorbing power factor
Under the right conditions, it may be feasible to use DR to minimize the PCC voltage fluctuation
due to the DR operation by absorbing reactive power. If a fixed power factor is used to absorb
reactive power, it may still be compliant with IEEE Std 1547. Please note that the absorbed
reactive power will need to be made up elsewhere in order to keep the substation transformer high
side power factor within requirements. Also, the magnitude of the resultant current will be higher
due to the reactive component, as compared with unity power factor operation, which may lead to
higher line losses. A load flow should be conducted to determine the amount of reactive power
needed and assess whether the inverter is capable of supplying it. Also, the developer may need to
provide a higher rated inverter to allow this mode of operation.
11.4.1.2 Issue: Quasi steady state high and low voltage (seconds to minutes)
Cause: High- or low-voltage excursions that develop on the order of seconds. Typically
mechanically switched capacitor or reactor banks or LTCs are designed to respond to steady state
events which develop over minutes (or longer). Quasi steady state voltage excursions may be due to
intermittent DR.
110
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Thyristor or insulated gate bipolar transistor (IGBT) switched capacitor or reactor banks
Static var compensator
STATCOM devices
Adjustment of reactive power generation or absorption by DR resources
Change existing shunt capacitor or reactor bias points to avoid nuisance switching
Energy storage systems
Under the right conditions, it may be feasible to use DR to minimize the PCC voltage fluctuation
due to the DR operation by absorbing reactive power. If a fixed power factor is used to absorb
reactive power, it may still be compliant with IEEE Std 1547. Please note that the absorbed
reactive power will need to be made up elsewhere in order to keep the substation transformer high
side power factor within requirements. Also, the magnitude of the resultant current will be higher
due to the reactive component as compared with unity power factor operation, which may lead to
higher line losses. A load flow study should be conducted to determine the amount of reactive
power needed and assess whether the inverter is capable of supplying it. Also, the developer may
need to provide a higher rated inverter to allow this mode of operation.
11.4.1.3 Issue: Voltage imbalance (minutes or longer)
Cause: DR may be installed on single-phase services and may not be installed in a balanced manner
Add DR resources to absorb or generate power on the affected phase(s)
Reconfigure single-phase customer connections
11.4.1.4 Issue: Temporary overvoltage during phase-to-ground faults
Cause: Depending on system configuration, the single line-to-ground voltage may rise to as much
as 173% of the nominal line-to-ground voltage during single line-to-ground fault.
Interconnect DR to a different system configuration.
Insulate system to highest potential overvoltage level.
Install a ground bank on the area EPS primary system. A current transformer (CT) will be
connected either to the ground bank neutral or to its secondary delta to provide current for
protective relays. A ground bank may affect the distribution of ground fault current and be a
sink for normal current unbalance. The neutral should be designed to carry these currents.
11.4.1.5 Issue: Temporary overvoltage on faulted feeders subsequent to a loss of grid

condition
Cause: Asymmetrical faults on weakly grounded or ungrounded systems and tripping of the main
feeder CB or recloser prior to DR disconnection that leads to forming an ungrounded system
Potential solutions: (Note that the following potential solutions trip off the DR once overvoltages
are sensed. These solutions may require that system insulation requirements, including arresters,
take into account these temporary overvoltages.)
111
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Use of a ground bank and neutral over current protection (50N) to disconnect DR intertie
breaker
Use of high side broken delta with neutral overvoltage protection disconnect DR intertie
circuit breaker 11
Use suitable ground fault detection method to disconnect DR
Direct transfer trip to disconnect DR
Control design to assure that DR is not providing overvoltages upon loss of grid
11.5 Potential solutions for impacts on power quality
When a preliminary review, conventional distribution study, or special impact system study identifies a
potential for power quality concerns, mitigation techniques should be considered.
Criteria and identification. Studies may identify several impacts on power quality including flicker,
sags and swells, and harmonics.
The preliminary review may identify the potential for power quality concerns. A steady state
simulation (see 8.2) defines the impedance and voltage parameters. The degree of impact of power
quality concerns is further identified in special impact studies. Pertinent studies for power quality
concerns include quasi-static simulation (see 9.4), dynamic simulation (see 9.5), transient
simulation (see 9.6), and harmonics and flicker (see 9.7).
General mitigation techniques. Power quality covers several different issues with differing
mitigation techniques. Flicker as well as voltage sags and swells can be mitigated by improving the
impedance of the system, changing grounding, and in some cases the voltage regulation system.
Harmonic issues may be mitigated by filters, changing grounding, changing transformer
configurations, changing the resonance characteristics of the distribution system by changing
capacitance or inductive characteristics, or changing the source(s) of harmonics by replacing
equipment or appropriate tuning.
11.5.1 Example methods for mitigating impacts on power quality
11.5.1.1 Issue: Excessive harmonics
Cause: DR contributing harmonics to the system along with harmonics already on the system from
other sources.
Installation of filters
Different DR interface technology
Vendor tuning of the interface controls
Move other sources of harmonics to another line
Decrease SCCR by increasing substation transformer size
11
See Basler Application note The 59N and Broken Delta Applications #PC-59N01, August, 2004.
112
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
11.5.1.2 Issue: Excessive flicker
Cause: DR produces noticeable changes in output of incandescent lighting caused by voltage

changes on the EPS.
Reduce the system impedance at the PCC. This can be done with series capacitors, upgraded
line conductors, upgraded feeder voltage level, or upgraded substation transformer size.
Alter the appropriate characteristics of the DR. For example, the number of on-and-off
switching operations may be constrained, or operation may be allowed only under favorable
conditions. A wind turbine vendor can sometimes make changes to the control system and
reduce flicker levels.
Disperse the DR. The voltage fluctuation contributions of smaller DR units will not be
perfectly correlated, even with wind and solar. Therefore, the total voltage fluctuation level
should decrease.
Install a static var system (e.g., DSTATCOM) to counteract the DR switching operations and
output variations. This is often done for large loads, and the application is well understood but
relatively expensive.
Adjust the feeder voltage regulator and capacitor switch settings if those are contributing to
the problem.
Operate at leading power factor (absorb reactive power).
Operate in closed-loop voltage control.
113
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Annex A
(informative)
Bibliography
Bibliographical references are resources that provide additional or helpful material but do not need to be
understood or used to implement this standard. Reference to these resources is made for informational use
only.
[B1] Distribution Grid Management (Advanced Distribution Automation) Functions. Use Case
Description, submitted to the SGIP DEWG, PAP8, 2/2010.
[B2] Dugan, R. C., McGranaghan, M. F., Santoso, S., and Beaty, H. W., Electrical Power Systems
Quality 2nd Edition. New York: The McGraw-Hill Companies, 2002, pp. 373-435.
[B3] EPRI 1000419, Engineering Guide for Integration of Distributed Generation and Storage into
Power Distribution, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, 2002.NERC, Special Report:
Accommodating High Levels of Variable Generation, April 2009.
[B4] EPRI 1020832, Development of Data and Information Exchange Model for Distributed Energy
Resources, Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, 2010.
[B5] Evans, P., Identification of Low-impact Interconnection Sites for Wholesale Distributed
Photovoltaic Generation Using Energynet Power System Simulation, California Energy Commission
Report No. CEC-200-2011-014.
[B6] Gish, W. B, Feero, W. E., and Greuel, S., Ferroresonance and Loading Relationships for DSG
Installations, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, Vol. PWRD-2, No. 3, July 1987.
[B7] IEEE Std 1159-2009, IEEE Recommended Practice for Monitoring Electric Power Quality.12
[B8] IEEE Std 1547.4-2011, IEEE Guide for Design, Operation, and Integration of Distributed
Resource Island Systems with Electric Power Systems.
[B9] IEEE Std 1547.6-2011, IEEE Recommended Practice For Interconnecting Distributed Resources
With Electric Power Systems Distribution Secondary Networks.
[B10] IEEE Std C62.92.1, IEEE Guide for the Application of Neutral Grounding in Electrical Utility
Systems, Part 1Introduction.
[B11] IEEE Std C62.92.4-1991, IEEE Guide for the Application of Neutral Grounding in Electrical
Utility Systems, Part IVDistribution.
[B12] Katiraei, F., Holbach, J., and Chang, T., Impact and Sensitivity Studies of PV Inverters
Contribution to Faults based on Generic PV Inverter Models, Quanta Technology, May 2, 2012.
[B13] Keller, J., and Kroposki, B., Understanding Fault Characteristics of Inverter-Based Distributed
Energy Resources, NREL Report No. TP-550-46698, 2010, pp. 48.
[B14] Kojovic, L., Modern techniques to study voltage regulator - DG interactions in distribution
systems, 2008 T&D conference and exposition.
[B15] Markushevich, N., Applications of Advanced Distribution Automation in the Smart Grid
Environment, T&D Online Magazine, Jan/Feb 2010 issue.
[B16] Markushevich, N., Information Exchange Between Transmission and Distribution Domains.
12
IEEE publications are available from The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 445 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854,
USA (http://standards.ieee.org/).
114
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
[B17] NERC, Special Report: Accommodating High Levels of Variable Generation, April 2009.
[B18] Salman, S. K., and Teo, A. L. J., Dynamic Behaviour of Integrated Multiple Wind Farms during
Fault Conditions on the Hosted Distribution Network, proceedings of IEEE Power Tech, 2005, pp. 1-4.
[B19] UL 1741, Inverters, Converters, Controllers and Interconnection System Equipment for Use with
Distributed Energy Resources.
115
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Annex B
(informative)
Sample data for impact studies
Obtaining realistic and trustable data sources may be considered as one of the major challenges in
performing comprehensive DR impact studies. While Area EPS operators and DR owners may have access
to some design and nameplate type data of the equipment and system component, not all the detailed
parameters of various elements may be available. In some cases, for missing data, some assumptions on
sample parameters and range of values may help expedite the studies. This section describes parameter
types and sample range of the parameters for each data type. The sample data provided can be found in
many electric utility systems and DR applications. This data should be considered only as example data and
is not an exhaustive list.
B.1 Main grid data
In a DR study, the main grid is normally represented by a voltage source at substation level or an
equivalent voltage source and one or two step-down transformer(s) feeding a feeder or multiple feeders on
a common bus. An example of generic main grid parameters for a distribution substation is shown in Table
B.1.
Table B.1Example main grid parameters for an example distribution substation

Parameters Example data
Short-circuit capacity (MVA) 300
Base voltage (kV) 24.9
X/R ratio 15
Thevenin equivalent impedance (positive seq.) 0.2+j1.8
Thevenin equivalent impedance (negative seq.) 0.2+j1.8
Thevenin equivalent impedance (zero seq.) 0.6+j6.2
System fault current (TPH/SLG) -kA 14/12
Voltage THD 0.10%
Harmonic spectrum 1st-1pu, 3rd-0.1pu, 5th-0.05pu
B.2 Substation transformer data
If the main grid source is represented at a high voltage level (e.g., 69 kV or 115 kV), substation transformer
parameters are needed to model the low side voltage interface of the substation for the study. An example
of the generic parameters of a substation transformer is given in Table B.2.
116
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Table B.2Example substation transformer data

MVA 30
Frequency 60
Winding types D-Yg
Impedance data 8%
X/R ratio 30
No load losses 0.10%
Copper losses 0.20%
Manual or LTC LTC
Voltage ratio (kV) 69/12.47
Saturation data N/A
Grounding impedance (ohms) 0
DETC (de-energized tap changer) setting A, B, C, D, or E
B.3 Load tap changer and voltage regulator data
Load tap changers (LTC) and voltage regulators (VR) may be used on some distribution feeders to regulate
and maintain the voltage of the feeders within a preferred range during daily and seasonal load variations.
LTC is normally used at substation transformer regulating the bus voltage common to all feeders, while
VRs may be found in several locations along a feeder depending on length and loading of the feeder.
Sample LTC and VR parameters are given in Table B.3. The LTC and VR data may include number of
taps, time delay, percent regulation, regulated voltage setting, and bandwidth.
Table B.3Example load tap changer and voltage regulator data

LTC VR
Location Substation Along a feeder
Target and bandwidth 2% 2%
Time delays 30/45 sec 45/60 sec
Voltage control method Terminal voltage Load compensation
Load compensator settingsR/X N/A 0.1/0.3
(primary ohms)
Control scheme Forward Co-generation
Configuration Single pole Single pole
B.4 Circuit breaker and recloser data
Circuit breaker and recloser data is used for coordination studies to determine if the generators protection
settings coordinate with the EPS protection settings. The circuit breaker and recloser data may include
operating voltage, short-circuit current interrupting capability, continuous current rating, and interrupting
settings.
117
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Table B.4Example circuit breaker and recloser data

Configuration (time current curves) Various
Continuous current rating 800
Interrupt rating (kA) 32
Ground current pick up (amps) 360
Phase current pick up (amps) 600
Number of reclosing attempts 3
Reclosing intervals (seconds) 5, 10, 15
Reset time (seconds) 10
B.5 Capacitor bank data
Capacitor data is used to model EPS circuit reactive power management scheme. The capacitor bank data
may include bank operating voltage, bank kVAr size, control mode, and bank switch settings.
Table B.5Example capacitor bank data

Voltage class (kV) 15
Size (kVAr) 900
Typefixed, switched Fixed
Control modecurrent, voltage, time, kVAr, power Current
factor, temperature
On to Off time delay (seconds) 30
Sensing phase A
B.6 Feeder protection equipment data
The protection equipment data may include protection device type, operation parameters, and device
location. Protection equipment usually includes fuses, breakers, and reclosers and is discussed in B.4.
Table B.6Example feeder protection equipment data

Fused cutout Sectionalizer
Continuous current (amps) 1-300 10-400
Ground min. actuating current (amps) 2-600 3.5-448
Phase min. actuating current (amps) 2-600 16-640
Rated voltage (kV) 4-38 4-38
Interrupting rating (sym. rms kA) 8-20
Reset time (seconds) N/A 15-180
Operations to lockout 1 1-3
B.7 Load data
The load data may include current, kVAr, and kW by phase and load allocation algorithm. Metered load
data is not instantaneous load data but load data averaged over a given time period such as 15 minutes, 30
minutes, etc. Minimum load data is often estimated to be 1/3 of peak load data. Alternatively, minimum
load may also be the minimum load data for the smallest circuit section served by the DR. Larger demand
loads and their location may be known from specific customer metering and their use contributes to more
accurate models.
118
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Table B.7Example load data

Substation load
Load components kVA, kW, kVAr
Size (kVA) 2-30 MVA
Location Metered at transformer bus
Connection type Wye or delta
Load type Commercial, industrial, residential
Feeder load
Size (kVA) 2-30 MVA
Location Metered at feeder breaker
Customer load
Size (kVA) 0.5-30 MVA
Location Metered at customer PCC
B.8 Feeder (sections) data
Feeder section data may include data within ranges provided in Table B.8 and Table B.9 as well as voltage
regulators, capacitors, switches, fused cutouts, sectionalizers, reactors, and distribution transformers.
Table B.8Example feeder section data

Overhead lines Example data or ranges
Line length (feet or meters) 100-10 000
Conductor size and type 6-556 kCM, Al, AA, ACSR, or Cu
Conductor geometry Horizontal, vertical, armless
Earth resistivity (ohms) 20-400
Phase spacing data (inches) 18-50
Nominal rating (amps) 165-730
Table B.9Example feeder section data
Underground cables Example data or ranges
Cable configuration Multi-wire concentric neutral cable, shielded cable,
unshielded
Cable length (feet) 100-5000
Rated voltage (kV) 5-35
Cable size 180-1000 kCM
Cable Z1 impedance (ohms/mile) 2.3+j0.7 to 0.2+j0.2
Cable Z0 impedance (ohms/mile) 2.3+j0.7 to 0.5+j0.1
Cable Z1 admittance (US/mile) 93-300
Cable Z0 admittance (US/mile) 93-300
Earth resistivity (ohms) 20-400
Phase spacing data (inches) 4-10
Insulation type XLPE, EPR
B.9 DER datarotating machine type
Distribution resource rotating machines include synchronous and induction machines. They are the most
susceptible to severe mechanical forces due to loss of synchronization.
119
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Table B.10Example generator data

Equipment parameters Synchronous Induction
Rater power (kVA) 2500 1500
Rated voltage (kVLL) 13.2 13.2
Active generation (kW) 2000 1250
Power factor (%) 85 -85
Max. reactive power (kVAr) 1500
Min. reactive power (kVAr) -1500
Steady state impedance (pu or ohms) 0.2+0.05
Transient impedance (pu or ohms) 0.1+j0.13
Subtransient impedance (pu or ohms) 0.1+j0.098 0.01+j0.05
Zero sequence impedance (pu or 0.1+0.023
ohms)
Machine grounding impedance 25
(ohms)
Winding configuration Wye or delta Wye or delta
Rated speed 1800 1850
Efficiency (%) 90
B.10 DR dataelectronically coupled type
Many renewable power sources and energy storage devices produce dc output voltage (or variable
frequency output voltage that is first rectified to dc). Such power sources are coupled to the EPS through
electronic dc/ac inverters. Electronic control makes synchronization of inverter output with the EPS much
easier than in the case of a rotating synchronous machine generator. The inverter acts as a controlled,
current-limited, real and reactive power source. The inverter real power output varies with the source power
output, while reactive power (leading or lagging) is generated by the inverter itself. Since the output power
from the inverter can affect the voltage in the EPS, voltage regulation and transient portions of an impact
study need to include a prediction of the expected variability of the generator output. Solar generator
impact studies need to include a prediction of the expected variability of generator output as a function of
expected sunlight variability. Wind generator impact studies need to include a prediction of the expected
variability of generator output as a function of expected wind variability. The models of the inverters may
include the power source (e.g., PV array or wind turbine) to provide convenience for the transient study. A
general inverter model may include data shown in Table B.11. An inverter often uses a distribution
transformer to step the voltage up to EPS voltage level for interconnection.
Table B.11Example inverter data

Rated power (kVA) 150
Rated voltage (kV) 0.69
Active generation (kW) 100
Power factor 100
Max. fault contribution (%) 107
Fault current duration (cycles) 10
Reactive power control range 45% of rated MVA with Q priority control over 10%
voltage range from nominal
Power factor control range 0.9 lagging to 0.9 leading at nominal MW power, and
0.85 lag to 0.85 lead at reduced power
B.11 Solar PV inverters
Solar PV inverter models may include a prediction of the expected variability of generator output as a
function of expected sunlight variability. In addition to inverter data shown in Table B.11, a solar PV panel
model may include data shown in Table B.12. The PV panel characteristics, the number of series and
parallel panels, and orientation of panels are used to determine the production and variations. The inverter
will often use a distribution transformer to step the voltage up to EPS voltage level for interconnection.
120
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Table B.12Example additional PV panel data

Maximum current (amps) 20
Maximum voltage (volts) 20
Short-circuit current (amps) 23
Open circuit voltage (volts) 23.5
Short-circuit current temperature coefficient (amp/ C) 0.002
Open circuit voltage temperature coefficient (volt/ C) -0.08
Normal operating cell temperature (C) 45
Reference ambient temperature (C) 20
Standard test condition temperature (C) 25
Standard test condition insolation (W/m2) 1000
B.12 Wind turbine inverters
Wind turbine inverter models may include a prediction of the expected variability of generator output as a
function of expected wind variability. In addition to inverter data shown in Table B.11, a wind turbine
inverter model may include data shown in Table B.13. The inverter will often use a distribution transformer
to step the voltage up to EPS voltage level for interconnection.
Table B.13Example additional wind turbine inverter data

Rated maximum power (kW) 1645
Primary energy source Example data
Rated wind speed (ft/sec) 36
Cut-in wind speed (ft/sec) 9.8
Cut-out wind speed (ft/sec) 42.6
Number of blades 3
Rotor radius (ft) 164
Rated rotor speed (rpm) 16.2
Minimum rotor speed (rpm) 9.75
Maximum rotor speed (rpm) 16.2
Turbine inertia (lb-ft2) 16 325
Gearbox ratio 93.83
Spring constant (Nm/rad) 2700
Damping constant (Nm/rad) 5
Additional generator data that may be included is locked rotor data shown in Table B.14.
Table B.14Example additional wind turbine generator data

Stator (ohms) 0.0056+j0.0372
Magnetizing (ohm) 7.7+j1.54
Rotor #1 (ohm) 0.0098+j0.0745
Rotor #2 (ohm) 0.0098+j0.0745
Cage factor 0.8-j0.1
Generator inertia (MW*s/MVA) 0.55
B.13 Energy storage inverters
Energy storage inverters by design allow energy flow into and out of the EPS. The inverter will often use a
distribution transformer to step the voltage up to EPS voltage level for interconnection.
121
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Table B.15Example additional energy storage inverter data

Rated voltage (kV) 0.48
Active generation (kW) 2400
Power factor (%) 100
Fault contribution (%) 200
122
IEEE Std 1547.7-2013
Annex C
(informative)
Glossary
arc flash hazard: A dangerous condition associated with the release of energy caused by the electric arc
(see IEEE Std 1584-2002).
area electric power system (Area EPS): Facilities that deliver electric power to load (see IEEE Std
1547-2003).
distributed resource (DR): Source of electric power that is not directly connected to a bulk power
transmission system. DR includes both generators and energy storage technologies (see IEEE Std 1547-
2003).
impact study: A collection of electrical engineering studies addressing the effects of a DR interconnection
with an electric power system.
inverter: A machine, device, or system that changes direct-current power to alternating-current power (see
IEEE Std 1547-2003).
local electric power system (Local EPS): An EPS contained entirely with a single premises or group of
premises (see IEEE Std 1547-2003).
stiffness: The ability of an area EPS to resist voltage deviations caused by DR or loading. See:
stiffness ratio (see IEEE Std 1547.2-2008).
stiffness ratio: The relative strength of the area EPS at the PCC compared with the DR, expressed in terms
of the short-circuit kilovolt-amperes of the two systems. The stiffness ratio is calculated at the PCC, except
when there is a transformer dedicated to one customer. In this case, the stiffness ratio is calculated on the
high-voltage side of the dedicated transformer.
Stiffness ratio = SC kVA (Area EPS) + SC kVA (DR) = SC kVA (Area EPS) + 1 (C1)
SC kVA (DR) SC kVA (DR)
where
SC kVA (Area EPS) is the short-circuit contribution in kilovolt-amperes of the Area EPS (including
all other sources)
SC kVA (DR) is the short-circuit contribution in kilovolt-amperes of the DR being evaluated
(see IEEE Std 1547.2-2008).
123

IEEE STD 1547.7-2013 Guide For Conducting Impact Studies For DRI

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

IEEE STD 1547.7-2013 Guide For Conducting Impact Studies For DRI

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

IEEE Guide for Conducting Distribution

Impact Studies for Distributed

IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee 21

IEEE Guide for Conducting Distribution

IEEE Standards Coordinating Committee 21

Approved 11 December 2013

IEEE-SA Standards Board

Keywords: distributed energy resources, distributed generation, distributed power, distributed

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

Copyright 2014 by The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.

PDF: ISBN 978-0-7381-8872-0 STD98508

IEEE prohibits discrimination, harassment, and bullying.

Comments on standards should be submitted to the following address:

Secretary, IEEE-SA Standards Board

Laws and regulations

Robert Saint, Chair

Rasool Aghatehrani John Foster Rafael Nielson

Richard DeBlasio, Chair

David Bassett Kelvin Hecht Peter McNutt

Mohamed Abdel Khalek Keith Harley Alvaro Portillo

John Kulick, Chair

Masayuki Ariyoshi Mark Halpin Gary Robinson

Richard DeBlasio, DOE Representative

4. General considerations for DR impact studies ........................................................................................... 6

5. Operational and configuration considerations ...........................................................................................13

6. System impact example methodology .......................................................................................................33

7. Preliminary review criteria and sub-criteria ..............................................................................................34

8. Conventional distribution studies ..............................................................................................................60

9. Special system impact studies ...................................................................................................................72

10. Data requirements ....................................................................................................................................88

11. Impact mitigation overview ...................................................................................................................105

Annex A (informative) Bibliography ..........................................................................................................114

Annex B (informative) Sample data for impact studies ..............................................................................116

Annex C (informative) Glossary .................................................................................................................123

1.3 Intended audience

1.5 Document structure

1.5.2 Overview of the guide

This guide provides an overview of general considerations, operational considerations, configuration

General considerations, operational considerations, and configuration considerations are important to

3.1 Definitions, acronyms, and abbreviations

3.2 Acronyms and abbreviations

CAIDI customer average interruption duration index

DFAG doubly-fed asynchronous generator

DFIG doubly-fed induction generator

DMS distribution management system

DTT direct transfer trip

EDA electronic design automation

EMS energy management system

EMTP electromagnetic transients program

EPS electric power system

ISE interconnection system equipment

kVAr kilovolt-amperes reactive

LTC load tap changer

LVRT low-voltage ride-through

MVA mega volt amperes

NRTL nationally recognized testing laboratory

PCC point of common coupling

PID proportional, integral, and derivative

PLC programmable logic controller

PPE personal protective equipment

SCADA supervisory control and data acquisition

SCCR short-circuit current contribution ratio

SOP system operating procedure